Alex van Terheyden
10 ways the media manipulate you with their news by Noam Chomsky & The Wondering Englishman
As an Englishman, in the early years of my life before the internet came along, I had to endure only the corrupt news programs I could find in the United Kingdom. Over time I learnt to observe the propaganda being inflicted upon myself and the wider population. In this article, I will look at how the media pushes propaganda on the masses, and while many of the examples will be focused on the UK, much of this would also apply to any country where you find corrupt media organisations intent on power and control of the masses. One by One I will look at the "10 manipulative methods" that Noam Chomsky categorised and spoke about in his book on Media Control.
However, as the focus of this piece will be the British Media I think it might be wise to familiarise the reader with the British media. Like all countries around the world, the UK has several types of mass media: television, radio, newspapers, magazines and websites. The UK’s large music and film industries could also be considered the mass media and ways used to manipulate the population.
The UK’s biggest media providers are the publicly owned public service broadcaster, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). The BBC's largest competitors are ITV plc, which operates 13 of the 15 regional television broadcasters that make up the ITV Network, and the broadcaster Sky. Each and every one of these broadcasters is involved in the manipulation of the people. Let's now look at the 10 ways the media manipulate the masses.
1. The strategy of distraction
The primary element of social control is the strategy of distraction which is to divert public attention from important issues and changes determined by the political and economic elites, by the technique of flood or flooding continuous distractions and insignificant information.
Distraction strategy is also essential to prevent the public interest in the essential knowledge in the area of science, economics, psychology, neurobiology and cybernetics. "Maintaining public attention diverted away from the real social problems, captivated by matters of no real importance. Keep the public busy, busy, busy, no time to think, back to farm and other animals." (quote from text "Silent Weapons for Quiet War").
The British Media and particularly the BBC push their agendas on a daily basis. Sadly in recent years, the BBC pushes the Neo-Liberal agenda of Globalism upon the unsuspecting viewers, listeners and readers. They do this by shaping the news for large swathes of the population. Some citizens in the United Kingdom only get their news from the BBC. The BBC workforce has been intent for decades on a borderless Europe and Borderless world. So much so that the consequences of open borders and the mass importation of people from all over the world, mean the BBC will only highlight the positive impacts. They will ignore negative news stories that changing demographics bring to a population. So much so that in 2014; when it was confirmed that 1400 young girls had been systematically raped by Asian men in the Northern English town of Rotherham they barely touched on the story. Instead what would be considered a massive news story was regulated to their local Sheffield and South Yorkshire BBC page. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089 - If you had blinked you would have missed the story at least on the day it broke.
For years, the BBC has followed the same line of brushing these stories under the carpet by distracting the masses with stories of people dancing or distracting them with news from the USA instead of focusing on real stories in the UK. In 2021, the BBC has ignored every single anti-lockdown protest that has happened in London. And yet when there has been a BLM or Extinction Rebellion Protest in central London they devote non-stop airtime to these causes because these causes suit their agenda.
2. Create problems, then offer solutions
This method is also called "problem-reaction-solution. It creates a problem, a "situation" referred to cause some reaction in the audience, so this is the principal of the steps that you want to accept. For example: let circumstances unfold and intensify the urban violence, or arrange for bloody attacks in order that the public is demanding further security laws and policies to the detriment of their freedom. Or: create an economic crisis to accept as a necessary evil with the retreat of social rights and the dismantling of public services.
Since the end of 2019 and the start of 2020, all media outlets in the UK that are owned by the Government or the Billionaires have all been peddling the same stories. Back in December 2019 and January 2020 networks in the UK and around the world started showing images on the television screens of Chinese people collapsing in the streets of Wuhan. We were told of dead bodies piling up in morgues in Chinese hospitals. All to instil fear into the general population. When the Global Lockdowns came the news networks had done such a fabulous job of beating the fear drum everyone accepted the authoritarian measures without question. People gave up their rights, their freedoms and their businesses, all because they believed what was happening was necessary. And yet as people began to notice that in no other country did people collapse in the streets and (at least in 2020) hospitals were not overrun with Covid victims - a solution was offered. The solution came in the form of untested new mRNA vaccines courtesy of our friends at big pharma. Coincidently the same industry that pays millions to all the networks in the form of advertising. Whose share prices would be at all-time highs in 2021 as their profit margins were in the billions thanks to the crisis that unfolded. In 2020 if the world had not watched the news, would they have known there was a pandemic? Death stats in 2020 suggest it wasn’t an exceptional year for deaths. And yet in 2021, when a solution has been provided to a problem, we only knew about only because the media had told us about it. Deaths now seem to be higher everywhere, despite the rollout of vaccines. Are they really vaccines? That is a topic for another day!
3. The gradual strategy
Acceptance to an unacceptable degree, just apply it gradually, for consecutive years. That is how they radically new socioeconomic conditions (neoliberalism) were imposed during the 1980s and 1990s:
the minimal state,
and do not guarantee a decent income,
... so many changes that would have brought about a revolution and anarchy in the streets if they had been applied all at once.
The BBC has been guilty of pushing the NeoLiberal agenda upon the population since the 1980s and it’s only gotten worse as the years have crept by. However, I think it’s very clear they have pushed the acceptance of every single one of these views listed above on behalf of big government and big business. In the last 2 years, the BBC has pushed the gradual strategy of giving up our rights to remain safe due to the Pandemic. Giving up our right to body autonomy came gradually with mask mandates, vaccine rollouts, then recently pushing mandatory vaccines and vaccine passports all with the rhetoric that it is for the good of society. Something that if it hadn’t have been done gradually; would have been resisted far harder. The LGBT & Environmental agenda has been pushed gradually and incrementally over the decades by the BBC. Some may argue that times are simply changing, but if they had shown what they are showing in 2021 back in 1981 there would be riots on the streets and people would have been smashing up their television sets in disgust. The gradual steps to make both these movements accepted by the BBC has happened over time.
4. The strategy of deferring
Another way to accept an unpopular decision is to present it as "painful and necessary", gaining public acceptance, at the time for future application.
It is easier to accept that a future sacrifice than of immediate slaughter.
First, because the effort is not used immediately.
Then, because the public, the masses, always has the tendency to expect naively that "everything will be better tomorrow" and that the sacrifice required may be avoided.
This gives the public more time to get used to the idea of change and accept it with resignation when the time comes.