Replies

[you just need more real-life examples citing the date and source.]

Actually, examples abound. This one, from the Toronto Star,

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Render&c=Article&cid=1133218897841&call_pageid=968332188492

is a classic example of #15 Fogging an Issue. It starts with a catchy title, "Liberals Lose-Vote Looms", knowing that conservatives will rush to read the article, then it begins a long strange story about celebrations in the house as the Liberal's government COLLAPSES! It only talks about everyone celebrating, as if no one lost anything, which of course is meant to fog over the loss of the Liberals. That would help prevent confidence and opportunism on the part of their enemies (the conservatives). When I got to the line about the Prime Minister laughing out and wishing everyone a merry election ("“Let’s get started here,” a smiling Martin shouted to his MPs amid loud cheers at a caucus meeting. “Time’s awastin”’"), I knew this was Fogging an Issue, HE HAS JUST LOST POWER (for being too corrupt, among other things), NO ONE WOULD CHEER AT THAT!

It's funny, because I defined that technique 5 years ago, but if you look at #15 Fogging an Issue, you will see it follows the description precisely. Catchy title, nonsensical article. The media templates are definitely getting a little stale these days!

Another example is an article here on FR concerning Tom Tancredo.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1526916/posts
(you can see my post #183 on that thread)

I'm not commenting on his candidacy one way or the other, but this article uses #17 Preemptive Strike against him. With 82% of the population supporting immigration law enforcement, Tancredo CAN win. But this article starts by saying he CAN'T win at least three times right off the bat, it also states that he doesn't even expect to win, although that does not appear in a quote from Tancredo anywhere in the story. At the end of the article there is a paragraph instructing the GOP on how to defeat Tancredo. A strange bit of information in an unbiased "news" article, isn't it? The attack on his candidacy at the beginning and the directions on how to defeat him at the end are a classic example of #17 Preemptive Strike.
(My example of Preemptive Strike in the list bears an uncanny resemblance to this article, doesn't it? Shhhhh, don't tell!!)

So many examples of these techniques abound that I stopped my 'scrip to the St. Pete Times ("cream" of the crop from the Poynter Institute land jobs there) Why would I want to be seething with rage at 6:30 am?

I do think that these many devices could be distilled down to 10 max - ideally 5 so as to allow easy identification and ridicule - reducing their efforts to inconsequential babbling.

Where does quoting lib whackos as authoritive ("People for the Ameican Way" and then allowing them to denigrate conservatives as "right wing demagogues/idealogues" fit in?

Get to work John! ;-)

Everyone, regarding my post #53 where I analyze two articles, I had thought of creating a "Propaganda Ping List", where I routinely apply the techniques with examples in just this way. However it's quite time consuming, just these two took me over an hour (what with double checking, sourcing, etc.)

However, if there is enough interest, then I will make the time to do a once-a-month ping list with any examples of propaganda I might have seen analyzed for readers' convenience.

If anyone is interested in being on a monthly Propaganda Ping List please freepmail me and if there are enough people I can start one next month. Cheers, starbase