"Trans activists got about 45 people to stand on the sidewalk for 45 minutes in front of the Netflix offices and it was front page news in every major newspaper across the country?"
And tens of millions of people around the world are protesting for their freedoms, right now, and the media is silent.
Toby, a decade ago I began to see what you see. I ultimately wrote about it as The Spectacle of Reality. https://edbrenegar.com/the-spectacle-of-the-real/. This strategy / tactic ... ur ... simulation of politics is evolving very rapidly. What they cannot do is hide from it.
I recommend digging into the writings of Guy Debord - The Society of the Spectacle and Comments on The Society of the Spectacle, Jean Baudrillard's Simulacra and Simulation, Daniel Boorstin's The Image, Mario Vargas Llosa's Notes on The Death of Culture: Essays on Spectacle and Society, and Marshall McLuhan, who saw this coming before anyone, The Medium is the Message.
Those are great recommendations! I've read Jean Baudrillard and see the world differently now as a result. I look forward to reading the rest. Thank you!!! 🙌
Toby, this article on NYT is relevant. https://unherd.com/2021/11/why-the-new-york-times-rewrites-history/ . It shows that even the NYT is vulnerable to a spectacle culture. They need a complementary simulated persona to fit into their perception of the larger political demographic simulation. Confusing? Of course. That is why it works. It illustrates your point about PR firms driving campaigns. All spectacles are marketing simulations selling the commodity of the spectacle to claim the real prize, our attention.
I thought the 1619 Project was brilliant. My doctoral thesis was going to be on Adam Smith's views on slavery -- so I've read a fair amount of the slavery literature. And the 1619 Project was consistent with what I was discovering as well. The NYT does so many things wrong. This was one thing they got right in my view.
I studied African-American literature in college as an American Studies major. I grew up in the segregated South. Race has been the determinative issue of my political perspective. It ties the present, especially the politics of past half century, to the social structure of colonial and antebellum America. You and I could have a valuable conversation about it. My point is that nature of a spectacle culture does not allow for that conversation in public. As you point out in your original post, nothing happens organically. It is always a managed campaign. And these campaigns are not about the content, but about leveraging social influence for political power. I believe this is where French postmodern thought’s impact into the discussion matters, as everything is declared to be about power and so everything is reduced to the political. And the NYT is highly adept at this.
My thought upon reading the 1619 Project articles was... they are writing about a genocide, 400 years after it happened. I take them at their word that the ripple effects of that genocide are still felt today (not really a controversial thing to say). But they are writing it as another genocide is happening right now (still wiping out Black people too --just ask Hank Aaron). So 400 years from now the NY Times will write the 2021 Project about how they missed yet another genocide. But it's so silly to bite on the 1619 Project (which is what Republicans did, took the damn bait) instead of spending our energies pointing out the genocide that is happening RIGHT NOW.
I see the 1619 Project as a campaign. It was designed for political effect. I don't have an opinion about it. It is one perspective among many about the African-American experience. Its influence is tied to the prominence of the NYT. If the report had been published in a local paper in the South, or as a self-published monograph, its receptivity would have been different. Influence clusters around power centers. The NYT is one of those power centers. Does it disqualify the content? No. It just makes it more difficult to have an open conversation about it.
Wow ! that Youtube is fantastic. She formulates carefully so who knows, it might stay! Always been suspicious of commercials. Good things go by word of mouth, not by paid advertisements. Great video thanks TexBat
--Blurring the line between fantasy and reality, computer-generated influencers are hugely popular with teenagers and will yield increasing soft power as interest in the #metaverse grows
--brands enjoy the safety of associating with (virtual) influencers who have a pre-defined backstory and future
--businesses may prefer the ability to control everything.
--businesses . . . looking to "innovation and a new world order".
I am thinking of how corporations and governments can use technology to DIRECTLY and more effectively brainwash our kids, and at a younger age
I just learned that Facebook is not the only metaverse in the works. Disney, Netflix, and every major video game maker are planning metaverses as well. This is incredibly problematic.
That was a fun article Toby. Fun and depressing at the same time.
What's happened is now you can pick your favorite mouthpiece and shop for articles that support your jihad. I'd never use NYT for anything but bird cage liner, and have had some heated disagreements with family who think it's gospel. They by contrast think I'm a Neanderthal, who forages in the bushes for what I consume.
Maybe the conversations should not be on "news items" but a level up: why do you trust whom you trust? How do you background check your news source?
Brilliant piece, man. Thanks. Interesting that some events break out of the control grid. It is easy to keep news unfavorable to the oligarchy out of the news cycle if you own the media, but certain events, the fall of Kabul, for example, overwhelm the control system. Makes me wonder whether there are other ways of overwhelm the control system.
Cindy Sheehan was a slightly different, but similar, example.
I still recall how she ended up, standing alone on a street corner with her campaign sign, having obviously made the mistake of believing she was involved with something real.
The Kamalydia Kids — another example in the same genre.
It’s all fake, has been for decades. And this trajectory was as inevitable as the capture of our “government” by undemocratic forces. In the absence of a solid moral foundation among the citizens, the ruthless and vicious classes will thrust their way to the top. And the “man in the street”, stupefied by bread and circuses or beer and football as the case may be, stood by and let it happen.
Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. Weak men create bad times. Bad times create strong men, and so the cycle goes.
We are seeing the consequences of a very, very weak couple of generations.
Lon, if you should see this reply, I wasn't aware that Cindy Sheehan was "fake"-- can you explain what you mean, and give examples (specific to her story)? I was one of the people moved by her example, apprently naively.
Poor Cindy was heart-wrenchingly sincere, but she was mercilessly and cynically used as a prop. The poor dear thought her 15 minutes in the spotlight was because of her, completely oblivious to the reality that she was just a “useful idiot” until what was probably a gut-wrenching moment when she realized her usefulness had expired and she had been cast aside like an empty pizza box the morning after the party.
See David “Camera” Hogg and probably a long list of others for further examples.
Yes, of course! Have you seen those MDs and PhDs in the media and on the bird? At least with some of them, they are babes - like the current CDC director.
Thanks again Toby, I'm in NZ and this morning the arranged news was celebrating that today the v'd can get a v 'passport to freedom'. On the same day a piece of the campaign to extend the v's to children ran the line 'CV19 in the top 10 of child killers' https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/455873/us-expert-start-testing-nz-classrooms-for-covid-19 She's from John Hopkins University, and I'm thinking this is yet another marketing campaign.. but how can I prove it?
"Trans activists got about 45 people to stand on the sidewalk for 45 minutes in front of the Netflix offices and it was front page news in every major newspaper across the country?"
And tens of millions of people around the world are protesting for their freedoms, right now, and the media is silent.
Toby, a decade ago I began to see what you see. I ultimately wrote about it as The Spectacle of Reality. https://edbrenegar.com/the-spectacle-of-the-real/. This strategy / tactic ... ur ... simulation of politics is evolving very rapidly. What they cannot do is hide from it.
I recommend digging into the writings of Guy Debord - The Society of the Spectacle and Comments on The Society of the Spectacle, Jean Baudrillard's Simulacra and Simulation, Daniel Boorstin's The Image, Mario Vargas Llosa's Notes on The Death of Culture: Essays on Spectacle and Society, and Marshall McLuhan, who saw this coming before anyone, The Medium is the Message.
Those are great recommendations! I've read Jean Baudrillard and see the world differently now as a result. I look forward to reading the rest. Thank you!!! 🙌
Toby, this article on NYT is relevant. https://unherd.com/2021/11/why-the-new-york-times-rewrites-history/ . It shows that even the NYT is vulnerable to a spectacle culture. They need a complementary simulated persona to fit into their perception of the larger political demographic simulation. Confusing? Of course. That is why it works. It illustrates your point about PR firms driving campaigns. All spectacles are marketing simulations selling the commodity of the spectacle to claim the real prize, our attention.
I thought the 1619 Project was brilliant. My doctoral thesis was going to be on Adam Smith's views on slavery -- so I've read a fair amount of the slavery literature. And the 1619 Project was consistent with what I was discovering as well. The NYT does so many things wrong. This was one thing they got right in my view.
I studied African-American literature in college as an American Studies major. I grew up in the segregated South. Race has been the determinative issue of my political perspective. It ties the present, especially the politics of past half century, to the social structure of colonial and antebellum America. You and I could have a valuable conversation about it. My point is that nature of a spectacle culture does not allow for that conversation in public. As you point out in your original post, nothing happens organically. It is always a managed campaign. And these campaigns are not about the content, but about leveraging social influence for political power. I believe this is where French postmodern thought’s impact into the discussion matters, as everything is declared to be about power and so everything is reduced to the political. And the NYT is highly adept at this.
My thought upon reading the 1619 Project articles was... they are writing about a genocide, 400 years after it happened. I take them at their word that the ripple effects of that genocide are still felt today (not really a controversial thing to say). But they are writing it as another genocide is happening right now (still wiping out Black people too --just ask Hank Aaron). So 400 years from now the NY Times will write the 2021 Project about how they missed yet another genocide. But it's so silly to bite on the 1619 Project (which is what Republicans did, took the damn bait) instead of spending our energies pointing out the genocide that is happening RIGHT NOW.
I see the 1619 Project as a campaign. It was designed for political effect. I don't have an opinion about it. It is one perspective among many about the African-American experience. Its influence is tied to the prominence of the NYT. If the report had been published in a local paper in the South, or as a self-published monograph, its receptivity would have been different. Influence clusters around power centers. The NYT is one of those power centers. Does it disqualify the content? No. It just makes it more difficult to have an open conversation about it.
Thanks for your good work. It matters.
Awesome post. I recommend Sharyl Attkisson, one of the few actual journalists left
https://youtu.be/-bYAQ-ZZtEU (can't believe this is allowed on YouTube still)
https://sharylattkisson.com/2016/07/top-10-astroturfers/ Dorito and Gorski
Wow ! that Youtube is fantastic. She formulates carefully so who knows, it might stay! Always been suspicious of commercials. Good things go by word of mouth, not by paid advertisements. Great video thanks TexBat
"Corporations know that stories are a powerful way to influence people."
Which is exactly why we need to be focusing on counter-stories. Stories that tell the abhorrent truth about the vaxxines and the evil behind them.
This is how The Matrix is built. One. Fake. Story. At. A. Time.
Thanks MainSteamNews, Big Corp, Big Govt for creating this fake world. Not!
I am opting out and no longer complying with your fake actors demands. I am trusting my own intuition and divine connection from now on for my truth.
I just read two articles that jolted me awake reminding me of this post: The first was . . .
https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/the-kids-are-definitely-not-alright/
That led me to . . .
https://news.yahoo.com/world-order-asias-virtual-influencers-021414890.html
A few notes:
--Blurring the line between fantasy and reality, computer-generated influencers are hugely popular with teenagers and will yield increasing soft power as interest in the #metaverse grows
--brands enjoy the safety of associating with (virtual) influencers who have a pre-defined backstory and future
--businesses may prefer the ability to control everything.
--businesses . . . looking to "innovation and a new world order".
I am thinking of how corporations and governments can use technology to DIRECTLY and more effectively brainwash our kids, and at a younger age
I just learned that Facebook is not the only metaverse in the works. Disney, Netflix, and every major video game maker are planning metaverses as well. This is incredibly problematic.
That was a fun article Toby. Fun and depressing at the same time.
What's happened is now you can pick your favorite mouthpiece and shop for articles that support your jihad. I'd never use NYT for anything but bird cage liner, and have had some heated disagreements with family who think it's gospel. They by contrast think I'm a Neanderthal, who forages in the bushes for what I consume.
Maybe the conversations should not be on "news items" but a level up: why do you trust whom you trust? How do you background check your news source?
Always a pleasure reading your opinions.
Brilliant piece, man. Thanks. Interesting that some events break out of the control grid. It is easy to keep news unfavorable to the oligarchy out of the news cycle if you own the media, but certain events, the fall of Kabul, for example, overwhelm the control system. Makes me wonder whether there are other ways of overwhelm the control system.
Love your work!
Thank you!!! 🙌
Well said!
One might say that the real treasure was the oppositional defiant disordereds we met along the way.
😂😂😂 Oh that's hilarious!
Cindy Sheehan was a slightly different, but similar, example.
I still recall how she ended up, standing alone on a street corner with her campaign sign, having obviously made the mistake of believing she was involved with something real.
The Kamalydia Kids — another example in the same genre.
It’s all fake, has been for decades. And this trajectory was as inevitable as the capture of our “government” by undemocratic forces. In the absence of a solid moral foundation among the citizens, the ruthless and vicious classes will thrust their way to the top. And the “man in the street”, stupefied by bread and circuses or beer and football as the case may be, stood by and let it happen.
Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. Weak men create bad times. Bad times create strong men, and so the cycle goes.
We are seeing the consequences of a very, very weak couple of generations.
Lon, if you should see this reply, I wasn't aware that Cindy Sheehan was "fake"-- can you explain what you mean, and give examples (specific to her story)? I was one of the people moved by her example, apprently naively.
Poor Cindy was heart-wrenchingly sincere, but she was mercilessly and cynically used as a prop. The poor dear thought her 15 minutes in the spotlight was because of her, completely oblivious to the reality that she was just a “useful idiot” until what was probably a gut-wrenching moment when she realized her usefulness had expired and she had been cast aside like an empty pizza box the morning after the party.
See David “Camera” Hogg and probably a long list of others for further examples.
Show her proper respect by using her credentials:
Prof Dr. Greta Thunberg MBA MD JD MPH PhD
She's repulsive. Is there a graduate program in being repellent and obnoxious?
Yes, of course! Have you seen those MDs and PhDs in the media and on the bird? At least with some of them, they are babes - like the current CDC director.
Oh the CDC director! The poor poor dear. Her face would stop a runaway dump-truck.
As they say, "beauty is in ...." :)
Good one.
Now I know why Greta Thunberg never got into my brain. I always felt something suspicious about her speeches.
Thanks again Toby, I'm in NZ and this morning the arranged news was celebrating that today the v'd can get a v 'passport to freedom'. On the same day a piece of the campaign to extend the v's to children ran the line 'CV19 in the top 10 of child killers' https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/455873/us-expert-start-testing-nz-classrooms-for-covid-19 She's from John Hopkins University, and I'm thinking this is yet another marketing campaign.. but how can I prove it?