It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
And on Friday, the Justice Department and the Office of Management and Budget circulated a memorandum instructing all executive branch agencies to ignore the G.A.O. findings.
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
The issue is more, "what is propaganda, and what is deliberate confusion of the enemy."
During any military excercise, confusing your enemy is a valid and important tactic. However, in this age of pervasive media saturation, confusion strategies through normal means is difficult. Unfortunately, modern tactics seem to require feeding deliberately incorrect information to the media for strategic purposes.
I'm not saying I like it, just that it's understandable.
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
The issue is more, "what is propaganda, and what is deliberate confusion of the enemy."
Originally posted by Banshee
Propaganda and bias are relative terms,
and both are a two-way street.
Objectivity is a better trait, IMO.
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
The issue is more, "what is propaganda, and what is deliberate confusion of the enemy."
During any military excercise, confusing your enemy is a valid and important tactic. However, in this age of pervasive media saturation, confusion strategies through normal means is difficult. Unfortunately, modern tactics seem to require feeding deliberately incorrect information to the media for strategic purposes.
I'm not saying I like it, just that it's understandable.
Originally posted by soficrow
I had forgotten this argument. Thanks for bringing it up SO.
The idea that government propaganda in the media will confuse our enemies seems to me a bit lame.
First off, any enemy that needs to rely on public media for its intel probably doesn't present all that much of a danger. They're not going to believe it any way - and any enemy with resources is using their own sources.
Secondly, the main party duped by the propaganda is the American public. Many Americans still trust the government and the media - US enemies don't. Leading to the question: Who's the real target?
...So I really don't see how propaganda does anything but manipulate the public it's supposed to protect. While our enemies laugh.
Originally posted by Banshee
Propaganda and bias are relative terms,
and both are a two-way street.
Objectivity is a better trait, IMO.
Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Sofi
I disagree with your classification of the word objective as being relevant only to history...
I believe objectivity is a idealized state of perfection, perhaps we're never able to reach it, but it serves as an excellent focal point.
Nowadays objective simply means, or at least its connotation is, to consider more than your own subjective reality when making judgements on shared reality,...
Objectivity is something I strive for.
I collect information, identify viewpoints, and try to get a 3-D picture of the problem. We don't necessarily have to give in to complete subjectivity.
as posted by soficrow
The idea that government propaganda in the media will confuse our enemies seems to me a bit lame.
as posted by SkepticOverlord
The issue is more, "what is propaganda, and what is deliberate confusion of the enemy."
During any military excercise, confusing your enemy is a valid and important tactic. However, in this age of pervasive media saturation, confusion strategies through normal means is difficult. Unfortunately, modern tactics seem to require feeding deliberately incorrect information to the media for strategic purposes.
I'm not saying I like it, just that it's understandable.
as posted by another member
Objectivity is something I strive for.
Not me. I think it's a crock. I admit out front that I can't cover all the angles and don't lie or pretend that I can.
A journalist's mission is to present concrete, objective facts based on their experience in judging what is important to their audience. A journalist presents facts that anyone would see if they could stand in the journalist's shoes themselves. If the facts being reported are controversial, journalists are expected to report as much.
Yet it is not the job of the journalist to support particular beliefs. Journalists serve as the eyes and ears of their audience, but not their mind. It is left to the reader to draw whatever conclusions are appropriate from the news—not to the reporter.
It is interesting then to note how many journalists believe that their ability to report facts objectively is impossible—an ideal that can be approached, but never reached. Every communications professor I have studied under at George Mason has argued that facts are not observable aspects of the world, but instead are consensually agreed upon statements about it. By this view, the mere perception of facts distorts them. Truth is not determined by hardnosed perception, but by committee.
Originally posted by Seekerof
as posted by soficrow
The idea that government propaganda in the media will confuse our enemies seems to me a bit lame.
The SkepticOverlord made a very exacting mention, soficrow.
as posted by SkepticOverlord
The issue is more, "what is propaganda, and what is deliberate confusion of the enemy."
During any military excercise, confusing your enemy is a valid and important tactic.
Your concept of propaganda (that it is "lame") and its use by the government at times of declared war and undeclared war is mind-numbing, at best.
All of the above indicate and show example as to how the government has used "propaganda" through the media and its various appendages.