President Obama Legallized Propaganda

I agree with those whom have stated they don't see why it needed to be "officially" legalized. There was so much propaganda going on before; Why was it so imperative that it was put into words that it is now a "legal" thing to do (for the government of course)

This sort of gives us some insight into the administration's mindset, which was the original point of the thread.

I'm not here to debate whether or not we've been using propaganda, more like attempting to understand why it was so important to be put into a national defense bill.

The only conclusion I can come up with is:

The current administration is "openly" (i use that term lightly) admitting to using wide-spread psychological warfare against that of it's citizens. (What's new right?)

I ,personally, find it important because the current administration is doing things America would never do: Negotiating with terrorists, advocating propaganda to farther political agendas, allowing illegal immigrants into the country w/o taking the proper channels.

Why is there any necessity to repeal this law for the first time since 1948? Granted it was done in 2012, but still, I remain perplexed.

a reply to: Vortiki

perhaps they're is a desire on some part to make government PR run "smoothly"; so, rather than have sensationalist scandal-seeking/making, highly partisan "journalism", that we've had since at least the mid 2000's; we have something that tries to explain the program from the perspective of how it's supposed to function, and why the government created it.

You could also argue that it could begin to signal something up with the whole ukraine situation, or Yellowstone....

Frankly I hope it's option C: promoting a government action/program/etc. (think American Conservation Corps.)....

a reply to: Vortiki


Couldn't propaganda easily be classified as 'hate speech' ?

a reply to: 8675309jenny

no not unless it's hate speech.

propaganda is advertising for the most part.

On tonight, live from 10PM Eastern time!

Show thread with listening information

Bump ... we're going to see this addressed in court very soon. I want everyone to know that ATS knew better than their own elected politicians.

Un-frikkin-believable!!

a reply to: Deplorable

How did you even find this post? Also, no. No one's going to take this to court.

God stipulation, way to stay on point.
I think you have a great thread going. It begs the question, why was this legalized in 2012 and who does it serve? As many have said in this thread, it has been going on for years.
What was it that made putting it in black and white and making propaganda "officially" a law bidding governmental act?

Maybe it has something to do with the deep fakes(deepfake) we have been hearing recently.

I am looking forward to some of the top sleuths here at ATS getting to the bottom of this. I will try to look into this as well.
Star and flag!

originally posted by: Vortiki

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: Vortiki

I said one particular story, not the actual ruling, and what you wrote, doesn't actually dispute what I said.

It's up the to the STATION to determine whether or not they WANT to report HONESTLY.

That means, by definition, it is legal for them to lie.

~Tenth

Yeah, but this thread is about the legalization of propaganda, declared in black and white. I think there is a difference between propaganda and disinformation.

Big difference between the MSM and something like a poster that states "Salvage the Scrap, Bomb the Japs" Which was an actual poster used in ww2 before the ban on propaganda that can bee seen Here Which will also show the history of American propaganda usage.

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: Deplorable

How did you even find this post? Also, no. No one's going to take this to court.

I read the thread when I was but a Lurker, and it got stuck in my mind. The subject was looked like one of those things no one was supposed to pickup on and then ... voilà. I 'felt' this thing was gonna come around again. Watch with me.