We ARE in fact brainwashed - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Language, bias, ownership, influence; all media related topics.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14707213
MB. wrote:Solar cross, what do you see being communicated in, say, this popular Pepsi advertisement from 1992?

That the new pepsi can is even more beautiful than Cindy Crawford (jokes). And so what?

How do you put that on the same terror alert level as jesus creepers setting people on fire or communist water torturing doctrinal obedience into people?

Mountains out of molehills.
User avatar
By MB.
#14707234
I'm not sure why you desired to construct a straw-man in the second statement.

There are several interesting conditioning aspects taking place in the 1992 Cindy Crawford Pepsi advertisement. Firstly, there is the celebration of celebrity and wealth. Crawford is shown driving what appears to me to be a Lamborghini Diablo, or some such super-car, the price of which was over $250,000 in the early 1990s. This display of triumphant materialism is followed by Crawford herself, a global super-model, the personification of a de-humanized sex object. The children in the video represent the infantilization of the potential pepsi customers, and also conveys their youthful naivety as future consumers of sex and luxury commodities.

The Pepsi can itself, and Crawford's consumption of it, is displayed in a flagrantly phallic manner, building on the sex-charged objectification commenced with the luxury car and Crawford's body-as-object. What is especially significant here is the statement that follows that what is actually being advertised- it is alleged- is the "new" Pepsi can. This is hugely important because it confirms statements I have made above about the distinction between the commodity exchange of the product itself and the idea of the product. Taken literally, the advertisement is informing the viewer about a new colourized aluminium can, which of course, is something that we cannot actually consume. This reinforces that what is really on display is Pepsi's logos, the idea of Pepsi as something global, normal, desirable, and associated with material success and luxury. The advertisement does not attempt to convey the utility of purchasing the sugary syrup drink at all, but banks entirely on the logos surrounding and permeating the ideas we are to associate with the concept of Pepsi. Put shortly, this is a brilliant example of association advertising.

The humour, or joke, that you mention is the coup de grace in this equation: the children- the infantilized consumers- only notice the new can. This is important as it confirms that the punchline, the final thought conveyed to the audience of potential consumers, is the idea of the newness of the can rather than the product, or its utility or inherent use-value. Furthermore, the idea that the children do not notice the overt hyper-sexual, hyper-materialistic nature of the advertisement is an attack at the integrity of the viewer, who are essentially being reprimanded if they thought that what they were viewing might be construed as objectification- certainly not, we are reassured, it was all a "joke".

Surely you can appreciate the significance of broadcasting advertisements such as these (I used only one notable historic example, pertinent to the commodity we were discussing) for hours on end, every day, over and over again, to every TV viewer on the planet. Do you not feel that these messages could be creating an impact that differs from the purely functional capitalist desire to exchange money for Pepsi? If Pepsi in and of itself is such a useful and valuable product, would not the most effective advertisement consist entirely of information pertaining to the product's utility? Why do you think the advertisers have gone to such lengths- no doubt paying for the car, hiring Crawford, and filming and editing and buying advertising space are not cheap- only to focus on the idea of the Pepsi brand?
#14707253
SolarCross wrote:If they were gambling too hard on the emotional content of sporting games that could surely back fire as half the time the spectator's favoured team loses. Pepsi the drink of disappointment, defeat and humiliation! I honestly think you are grossly over-egging this little omelet. People do buy Pepsi because they are aware of it, the point of advertising is to communicate the existence of a product, remind people that it still exists and also to persuade people to buy it. Pepsi logo, or tire logo or whatever, at a stadium is only doing the first two. TV, radio and newspaper adverts offer more scope for persuasion. In comparison with the genuine brainwashing practised by religious institutions and political groups (since forever), commercial advertising is extremely weak tea at its worst. You are crying over nothing.

First of all, losing is part of the excitement of sports. People keep going back for more excitement no matter what, and it is this excitement that is transfered (psychologically)onto the products whose logos you see in the corner of your eye at sports venues.

Likewise, advertising is a trillion-dollar business - much more than organized religion in our days. But they both use the same primary propoganda techniques: Repetition (prayers, passing the same billboards every day, repeated commercials), emotional transfer (onto Pepsi, the virgin Mary, or sweet baby Jesus) and environmental saturation of logos (Pepsi machines, Pepsi t-shirts, crosses everywhere).

I understand why you don't want to believe that we are brainwashed. The very best coal-miners were the ones who didn't believe in black lung (which they all got anyways). Being a good company man means believing "in" the company, and not believing "in" black lung from the company.
#14707318
Do you two have any conception at all of who exactly is contriving these terrible weapons of mass mind control? No not Pepsi, that is not specific enough, Pepsi is a big corporation, thousands of investors, dozens of senior executives, hundreds if not thousands of managers and agents, tens of thousands of line workers.. who is it specifically that actually decides to put a Lamborghini, a super model and a couple of kids in a 30 second flick to tell a dumb joke so as to draw your attention to the fact that pepsi remains in existence and has a new can? No it is not the senior executives who are the macheivellian masterminds, they just approve or veto the budgets, advert content is dreamed up by line advertising workers, and what kind of people are they? B-grade media studies graduates, who in the twenties dreamed they would become best selling novelists, legendary movie directors, pulitzer prize winning journalists or celebrated artists but then after a few years (or just months) of starving trying to make it, realised they weren't that lucky or talented and that the best way they could enjoy the nice things in life was to leverage their mickey mouse degree for a job as an adman. The villains of your ludicrous conspiracy theories are bumbling lower-middle class mediocrities. They are not monsters like Mao Zedong or Torquemada they are just ordinary plebs just like you.

So what exactly is the terrible impact of Pepsi ads on society? 100 million starving chinese? thousands of "heretics" being flayed alive? The impact is well.. nothing. Some extra cans of drink were sold (maybe), some adman coaxed a payrise out of his manager and 10 seconds of mild amusement for a few million TV watchers. That's it. Nothing of note.

All your whining and weaving of byzantine conspiracy theories must have some point though, so what are you trying get? Censorship of commercial advertising? Gulags for B-grade media graduates? What is the point of this?
User avatar
By MB.
#14707343
Solar Cross, surely you appreciate how fundamental corporate advertising is to the perpetuation of capitalism and its materialist ethos. Do you feel that it is acceptable for entire industries to exist with the singular purpose of reinventing commodities ideologically to stimulate the desire for consumption? Do you feel it is acceptable to utilize mind invasive techniques such as association therapy, sexual stimulation, objectification, infantilization, and the glorification of hyper materialism to increase sales? Do you believe that the expenditure of human potential in the industrial production of television marketing is a state of affairs conducive to the health of civilization?
#14707380
MB. wrote:Solar Cross, surely you appreciate how fundamental corporate advertising is to the perpetuation of capitalism and its materialist ethos. Do you feel that it is acceptable for entire industries to exist with the singular purpose of reinventing commodities ideologically to stimulate the desire for consumption? Do you feel it is acceptable to utilize mind invasive techniques such as association therapy, sexual stimulation, objectification, infantilization, and the glorification of hyper materialism to increase sales? Do you believe that the expenditure of human potential in the industrial production of television marketing is a state of affairs conducive to the health of civilization?

I'd take it over anything you have to offer. Go live in North Korea if you don't like it.
User avatar
By MB.
#14707425
Solar Cross, I am disappointed you feel you have nothing to contribute to this conversation. I'm further saddened that you assume the best reply to my questions is to suggest I move to North Korea. I had hoped someone familiar with the logos of the pan European flag would have had more to say regarding this subject. I assume your opinionated feelings on this matter are derived from a distaste for academic analysis, rather than any displeasure with regard to my personal political opinions, of which you have no knowledge. Hopefully you'll feel more capable of resuming this conversation in the future.
#14707452
MB. wrote:Solar Cross, I am disappointed you feel you have nothing to contribute to this conversation. I'm further saddened that you assume the best reply to my questions is to suggest I move to North Korea. I had hoped someone familiar with the logos of the pan European flag would have had more to say regarding this subject. I assume your opinionated feelings on this matter are derived from a distaste for academic analysis, rather than any displeasure with regard to my personal political opinions, of which you have no knowledge. Hopefully you'll feel more capable of resuming this conversation in the future.

What a load of passive aggressive trash, telling me how I feel! LMAO! Lol that you think you are doing "academic analysis" oh the pomposity!, what you are doing is second rate crypto-religious narrative weaving, "just so" stories welded into conspiracy theory. You are no better than a scientologist and a lot less successful.

You never answered my questions as to the purpose of all these fictions trying to portray advertisements as brainwashing. I'll remind you:

Do you want censorship of commercial advertising?
Gulags for B-grade media graduates?
What is the point of this?
#14707533
:lol: This Solarcross character has a problem with context...
How do you put that on the same terror alert level as jesus creepers setting people on fire or communist water torturing doctrinal obedience into people?

Mountains out of molehills.


I'd take it over anything you have to offer. Go live in North Korea if you don't like it.

All your whining and weaving of byzantine conspiracy theories must have some point though, so what are you trying get? Censorship of commercial advertising? Gulags for B-grade media graduates? What is the point of this?

What a load of passive aggressive trash, telling me how I feel! LMAO! Lol that you think you are doing "academic analysis" oh the pomposity!, what you are doing is second rate crypto-religious narrative weaving, "just so" stories welded into conspiracy theory. You are no better than a scientologist and a lot less successful.
This kind of outlandish gibberish degrades Pofo's posting environment. Perhaps it is difficult for SolarCross to step out of his 'reality' and think about what it meant (sociologically) to be human before modern advertising and electricity. If you wish to participate in intelligent discussion, you should be able to think ahead & remember, because I feel as if you are incapable of walking in your ancestors shoes. Now before your attention span trails off, allow me to explain what I mean by that. If you study the history of language and symbology, you will find that human identity had been shaped through sensual cognitive association throughout the ages. Before the printing press, folks established an identity through different channels of communication; before electric circuitry, folks had different perceptions of reality, etc. For instance, did you know that the collective public or mass audience did not exist before the electric age of communication? It would of been very difficult (due to time & space constraints) & expensive to globally 'program' culture through newspaper articles before the telegraph, radio, television, etc. Please step outside of your time (your tiny box of perception, that foolish fixed perspective) and realize that modern advertising is not the pinnacle of beneficial civilized expression. Most ads tend to be myths perpetuated through mythic forms of engagement, one sensual magic wave that washes over you until it is a normalized form of communication.

Due to the brain's neuroplasticity, your identity can be incrementally changed simply from environmental stimuli. If you conduct some proper research and follow the birth of behavioral psychology, you will eventually grasp the undeniable fact that modern advertising tends to be the 'weaponized' form of behavioral psychology. Any student of university that graduates beyond the four year degree may rise to that level of discussion. "Marketing" is a thinly veiled field of research that wishes to get inside the head of every consumer in order to influence perception & lifestyle.

Marshall McLuhan put it this way in 1954:
"Ours is the first age in which many thousands of the best-trained individual minds have made it a full-time business to get inside the collective public mind. To get inside in order to manipulate, exploit, control is the object now. And to generate heat not light is the intention. To keep everybody in the helpless state engendered by prolonged mental rutting is the effect of many ads and much entertainment alike.

Since so many minds are engaged in bringing about this condition of public helplessness, and since these programs of commercial education are so much more expensive and influential than the relatively puny offerings sponsored by schools and colleges, it seemed fitting to devise a method for reversing the process. Why not use the new commercial education as a means to enlightening its intended prey? Why not assist the public to observe consciously the drama which is intended to operate upon it unconsciously?"

-First two paragraphs from the preface of MM's Mechanical Bride.


This video may be of interest. His communications theory goes right over Tom Brokaw's head.
#14707575
SolarCross wrote:Lol that you think you are doing "academic analysis" oh the pomposity!, what you are doing is second rate crypto-religious narrative weaving, "just so" stories welded into conspiracy theory. You are no better than a scientologist and a lot less successful.

Let me tell you about my pompous self.

I worked in advertising as an art director for few years, but got out and retrained because I couldn't stand the office environment or the ethos of what I was doing.

I then went back to university to study, specifically, media and politics: that is, to study the effect that mass media and other texts have on the social distribution of resources in various societies.

Your dismissal of other people's studies and research in this area... is actually the Pompous Elephant in the Room.

If we are in fact brainwashed, as I believe we are, then one of the implanted memes is that "we are so free and unbrainwashed, unlike all the alternative systems that are out there."

How much mass media do they stare at in North Korea? (I know they don't have mandatory bike helmets there, which makes them probably less brainwashed than Aussies)

Image
In the 70s, Pepsi shoes allowed non-brainwashed people to not forget the existence of a great-tasting and very trendy beverage
#14707675
QatzelOk wrote:Let me tell you about my pompous self.

I worked in advertising as an art director for few years, but got out and retrained because I couldn't stand the office environment or the ethos of what I was doing.

I then went back to university to study, specifically, media and politics: that is, to study the effect that mass media and other texts have on the social distribution of resources in various societies.

Your dismissal of other people's studies and research in this area... is actually the Pompous Elephant in the Room.

If we are in fact brainwashed, as I believe we are, then one of the implanted memes is that "we are so free and unbrainwashed, unlike all the alternative systems that are out there."

How much mass media do they stare at in North Korea? (I know they don't have mandatory bike helmets there, which makes them probably less brainwashed than Aussies)

Well that is interesting, it seems when I said:
The villains of your ludicrous conspiracy theories are bumbling lower-middle class mediocrities. They are not monsters like Mao Zedong or Torquemada they are just ordinary plebs just like you.
It was bang on the mark in your case, as you were literally one of them.

Did you ever aspire to be an artist, movie director or similar way back before you found a proper job? It might explain why you are seeing these phantoms, you want to be special. Being an adman didn't really tickle that itch, it's a just a pleb job, no will remember you for it, no one will honour you for it, so you had to dress up the job in your mind with some imaginary powers to mold and shape people's minds like putty in your hand, you weren't some second rate media hack, you were something like a villain from a bond flick, a Doctor Mesmer, powerful and dangerous. Oh but then you just part of a gaggle of "mind controllers", still not very special despite your ruinous powers of ultimate evil, you needed more and what better way to get super special that turn aside from your life of crime and become a singular crusader to save humanity from the insidious threat of the mind snatchers.

Some questions to all:

Aside from your "theorising" have any of you ever actually purchased something under the influence of mind control? I assume you have your tinfoil hats to protect you now but before you discovered the Truth you were presumably as open to suggestion as anyone else. Did the pepsi ad shown previously cause you to become sexually aroused in the presence of drinks vending machines? Did you ever put new tyres on your car when it didn't need them just because you thought a Pirelli girl might find you sexy?

For those that are married or otherwise under the influence of womankind:
Is your experience of the persuasive powers of advertising greater or lesser than the experience of the persuasive powers of your wife/girlfriend/fuckbuddy?

For those that have tangled with officialdom:
Is your experience of the persuasive powers of advertising greater or lesser than the experience of the persuasive powers of officialdom ie: police, judges, local administrators?

For those that have had friends:
Is your experience of the persuasive powers of advertising greater or lesser than the experience of the persuasive powers of peer pressure?

For those that have children:
Is your experience of the persuasive powers of advertising greater or lesser than the experience of the persuasive powers of your own child/ren?

For those that have enjoyed recreational arts: movies, novels, poems, music:
Is your experience of the persuasive powers of advertising greater or lesser than the experience of the persuasive powers of a weepy flick, action movie, love song or gripping page turner?

For those that have dabbled in political activism:
Is your experience of the persuasive powers of advertising greater or lesser than the experience of the persuasive powers of a rabble rousers & demagogues?

Just for a bit of perspective.
#14707681
SolarCross, in the above "survey," you are asking brainwashed people to anwer questions about whether or not they are brainwashed.

This is like standing outside the door of an exclusiary cult and asking the "believers" if they feel they have been psychologically manipulated.

It's very poor methodology.

SolarCross wrote:Did you ever aspire to be an artist, movie director or similar way back before you found a proper job? It might explain why you are seeing these phantoms, you want to be special.

If I wanted to be special, I'd buy an expensive German-designed SUV. Brainwashing has a place for "specialness."

It's too bad you don't seem to have any room left in your brainwashed mind for media theory because it's the only way to understand the side effects of commercial propaganda. Smart-alecky comments aren't helping you to understand this subject at all.

The villains of your ludicrous conspiracy theories are bumbling lower-middle class mediocrities. They are not monsters like Mao Zedong or Torquemada they are just ordinary plebs just like you.

Mao had lots of lower middle-class people working for him. And advertising plebs work for millionaire CEOs. "Ordinary plebs" have no use for propaganda/advertising. In fact, this form of brainwashing helps create the destitute classes.
Last edited by QatzelOk on 03 Aug 2016 14:09, edited 1 time in total.
#14707683
QatzelOk wrote:SolarCross, in the above "survey," you are asking brainwashed people to anwer questions about whether or not they are brainwashed.

This is like standing outside the door of an exclusiary cult and asking the "believers" if they feel they have been psychologically manipulated.

It's very poor methodology.


If I wanted to be special, I'd buy an expensive German-designed SUV. Brainwashing has a place for "specialness."

It's too bad you don't seem to have any room left in your brainwashed mind for media theory because it's the only way to understand the side effects of commercial propaganda. Smart-alecky comments aren't helping you to understand this subject at all.

I see so not only is the absence of evidence not evidence of absence but even further the absence of evidence is proof of presence. You would make Carl Sagan's invisible dragon much relieved to know that he must exist because there is no evidence of him.
#14707685
The only evidence I could point you to are texts by Jean Baudrillard, Marshall Mcluhan, and a host of others (Chomsky/Herman) that you seem to have no respect for, since you haven't mentioned them or addressed their work when it was mentioned by other posters.

To attack posters here in this thread for "mediocrity" or "trying to feel special" is a tactic that totalitarian governments use to smear any dissent. Since commercial media is totalitarian (top-down messaging with a centralized agenda).... you are not really respecting the divergent opinions and findings that are out there.

You have not provided any evidence that commercial media is NOT brainwashing. And the fact that it's a trillion-dollar industry (when twinned by PR, more propaganda), offers solid proof that it WORKS AT CHANGING OPINIONS TO SOMETHING MORE LUCRATIVE TO CENTRAL POWERS.

You know, the ones that don't exist except in the paranoid minds of those who have studied politics. :lol:
#14707701
QatzelOk wrote:The only evidence I could point you to are texts by Jean Baudrillard, Marshall Mcluhan, and a host of others (Chomsky/Herman) that you seem to have no respect for, since you haven't mentioned them or addressed their work when it was mentioned by other posters.

Opinion pieces are not evidence and those authors are not above criticism however much their groupies adore them, like Chomsky's Chomskybots.
Denis Dutton, founder of Philosophy & Literature's "Bad Writing Contest"—which listed examples of the kind of willfully obscurantist prose for which Baudrillard was frequently criticised—had the following to say:

Some writers in their manner and stance intentionally provoke challenge and criticism from their readers. Others just invite you to think. Baudrillard's hyperprose demands only that you grunt wide-eyed or bewildered assent. He yearns to have intellectual influence, but must fend off any serious analysis of his own writing, remaining free to leap from one bombastic assertion to the next, no matter how brazen. Your place is simply to buy his books, adopt his jargon, and drop his name wherever possible.


Marshall Mcluhan seems like he might have some interesting ideas, if I have some time I may read him some, but don't expect any abject credulity on my part.
QatzelOk wrote:To attack posters here in this thread for "mediocrity" or "trying to feel special" is a tactic that totalitarian governments use to smear any dissent. Since commercial media is totalitarian (top-down messaging with a centralized agenda).... you are not really respecting the divergent opinions and findings that are out there.
I am no more attacking you than a doctor is attacking someone by lancing a boil. Yes it smarts to have your swollen ego pricked, but if a way is made for all that toxic egotism and paranoia to flow out I will have helped you more than I have hurt you.
Buddhists call this "grandmotherly kindness".
QatzelOk wrote:You have not provided any evidence that commercial media is NOT brainwashing. And the fact that it's a trillion-dollar industry (when twinned by PR, more propaganda), offers solid proof that it WORKS AT CHANGING OPINIONS TO SOMETHING MORE LUCRATIVE TO CENTRAL POWERS.

I acknowledged from the start that admen attempt to persuade in addition to merely attempting to draw attention to some product. Where I am skeptical is the placing of these attempts to persuade far beyond that which anyone ordinarily endures from spouses, friends, cops or indeed your precious academics such that we can put them in same class of brainwashers as scientologists, doomsday cultists and communists. Or indeed that those exposed to advertisments are totally without defence against those persuasions. You are after all doing a little more than claiming that admen are brainwashers you are claiming that we are brainwashed, as in they have already won.
Should i not be skeptical?

There are no central powers, government comes close to being that but still not so much really, outside of places like the DPRK, Cuba or the USSR of course, but you not are talking about government are you, you are talking about shoe salesmen and fizzy drink vendors. You are looking particularly paranoid here, the gratuitous use of ALL CAPS notwithstanding.
#14707728
SolarCross, while you have endulged in some pretty competent Ad hom in this thread, you are defending brainwashing by pointing out that authors who share philosophy with mere mortals like us.... are mortals themselves.

No kidding.

Is that why you reject intellectual thought? Because ad hom plays better with the cheap seats? Leading dummies is easier if you play dumb (and resentful of non-dumbness) yourself? Screaming "I am normal!" while aiming sarcasm at people who dare to threaten our fatal orthodoxy?

Personally, I have learned to loathe people who pretend to lead by defending the status quo with easy sarcasm. This is not helpful at all. Ass-kissing the sickening status quo is a big part of our modern condition. We're killing ourselves because we've been brainwashed away from survival instincts, and live in fear of thinking outside of a box called "normal" which is communicated-from-up-above to us via mass media.

The American suburban consumer is currently doing nothing that will help his species survive, and is so distracted by mass media brainwashing that he can't even think for himself. Let alone come up with creative cures for our social sickness.

It has recently been demonstrated that all cancers are caused by technologies. There were no cancers before the neo-lithic period. So it's also likely that all our social problems and violence... are also caused by technologies. Which are fake, like plastic. Mass media is a fake way to socialize a human animal... incorrectly.

Your texts on this page amount to defending cancers because "the critics of cancer (the naysayers) can't cure cancer or describe its chemical composition."

What a weak argument. Your "arguments" are only bolstered by the intellectual stagnation of a dying culture. The Western mercenary and his fake sense of having a culture and ideas... has been revealed to be worthy of the Emperor's tailor.

Also: Sigmund Freud - psychological research - weaponized - Edward Bernays - the P.R. industry (google step-by-step)
Last edited by QatzelOk on 03 Aug 2016 23:05, edited 3 times in total.
#14707733
http://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/12/consumer.aspx

Manipulating behaviors
Intrigued by Freud's notion that irrational forces drive human behavior, Bernays sought to harness those forces to sell products for his clients. In his 1928 book, "Propaganda," Bernays hypothesized that by understanding the group mind, it would be possible to manipulate people's behavior without their even realizing it. To test this hypothesis, Bernays launched one of his most famous public relations campaigns: convincing women to smoke.
In 1929, it was taboo for women to smoke in public and those who flouted convention were thought to be sexually permissive. Bernays' client was George Washington Hill, president of the American Tobacco Company, who envisioned breaking this taboo to broaden the market for his Lucky Strike brand. Bernays asked Hill for permission to consult with New York's leading psychoanalyst and Freud disciple, Dr. A.A. Brill, and was granted this unusual request.
This was the first but not the last time Bernays would consult with psychoanalysts to help shape his public relations campaigns. When asked what cigarettes symbolized to women, Brill's response was that cigarettes were symbolic of male power.
Equating smoking with challenging male power was the cornerstone of Lucky Strike's "Torches of Freedom" campaign, which debuted during New York's annual Easter Parade on April 1, 1929. Bernays had procured a list of debutantes from the editor of Vogue magazine and pitched the idea that they could contribute to the expansion of women's rights by lighting up cigarettes and smoking them in the most public of places—Fifth Avenue. The press was warned beforehand and couldn't resist the story. The "Torches of Freedom Parade" was covered not only by the local papers, but also by newspapers nationwide and internationally. Bernays was duly convinced that linking products to emotions could cause people to behave irrationally. In reality, of course, women were no freer for having taken up smoking, but linking smoking to women's rights fostered a feeling of independence.






http://theconversation.com/the-manipula ... ions-44393
#14707742
Looking through my own library, if I may suggest...

    The Bias of Communications- Harold Innis

    Empire & Communications- Harold Innis

    Gutenberg Galaxy- Marshall McLuhan

    Mechanical Bride- Marshall McLuhan

    Understanding Media- Marshall McLuhan

    Laws of Media- Marshall McLuhan

    Culture is our Business- Marshall McLuhan

    Technopoly- Neil Postman

    Amusing Ourselves to Death- Neil Postman

    Culture Against Man- Jules Henry

    Propaganda- Edward Bernays

    Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes- Jacques Ellul

    Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media- Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky

    Alone Together: Why We Expect More From Technology & Less From Each Other- Sherry Turkle

    We, Robots- Curtis White

    Data & Goliath- Bruce Schneier

    Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era- Zbigniew K. Brzezinski

    Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse Of Global Transformation- Patrick M. Wood
Last edited by RhetoricThug on 03 Aug 2016 20:07, edited 1 time in total.

:?: I don't see what's so confusing about this.[…]

Anyway, unless this guy is ready to spill some bea[…]

I am sure he was just joking to relieve some of t[…]

lol I'm looking forward to seeing who the "hi[…]