NEWS: A Unique Opportunity: Pentagon Funds Screenwriters Conference

In an effort to make science a more attractive career choice for the next generation and to bring a sense of reality to popular science based thrillers, the U.S. Air Force and Army are funding grants for scientists to attend a seminar at the American Film Institute. Approximately $300,000 in funding from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR) and another $50,000 from the Army Research Office (ARO) have been earmarked for this program.



A unique program to say the least. It will be interesting to see if any of the screenplays make it to the "silver screen".

[edit on 8/5/2005 by ChemicalLaser]

The scientists are being tasked with making science cool to the masses so that more young adults choose scienctific careers.......

The goal is to manipulate the desires of our population. I actually agree with the motivation and intention in this case, but this is definetly a case where Hollywood is being utilized by the Government for specific intent.

I've seen some comments by some individuals here on ATS that have decried this possibility.......

Perhaps now, that they have it from the horses mouth, they might believe us. Hind sight, always the worse kind isn't it. People just like to believe what fits into their little world, than know the truth.

Oh well, can't say nobody said so, or tried.

Originally posted by ADVISOR
Perhaps now, that they have it from the horses mouth, they might believe us.

I'll be saving this as a reference for when the occasion arises.....

Originally posted by ADVISOR
Oh well, can't say nobody said so, or tried.

Yup. That be the truth.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with this. The military needs the sciences--we all do--and spending some money teaching scientists how to write screenplays probably will benefit us all, if only in terms of good entertainment. All too often those who are gifted at the sciences are not particularly gifted verbally. When's the last time you had to wade through a technical manual?


[edit on 2005/8/6 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by GradyPhilPott
Personally, I don't see anything wrong with this.

You're right, Grady. There is nothing wrong with this incarnation of intentional manipulation. Do you think that the people they are aiming for will have read this article? I don't. But here's the kicker....What other themes have been articulated subtlty in the big screen to mass manipulate the opinions of the populatoion? That's the problem.....Million-Dollar Baby just happened to coincide with the Terry Schiavo case. There's one way that Holly wood can be said to have had an alterior motive.

The difference here is that we have an admission that won't be extrapolated on...

Encouraging the population to gain an education is a great endeavor......it's how they are doing it that has my red flags up...

This was done for the U.S Space Program in the 1960's wasnt it? Didnt NASA call on Hollywood to make the space launches as theatrical and as awe inspiring as possible to ensure the countries continued interest (i.e. funding)?

I see this as having two benefits over simpl press releases and such. One, it will probably result in more accurately based movies, and Two it may end up attracting more people into science. Danged if I can see any real problem with the approach.

Originally posted by Astronomer68
Danged if I can see any real problem with the approach.

The real problem is actually quite subtle......the implicit truth being communicated by this story is that teh government is taking advantage of the vulnerability of the public when they take down all their mental guards to be entertained.

The public is arguably devoid of a functional understanding of how and why they think the way they do. But government studies have gone out of their way to determine just that......so where is the equality when a government department is utilizing information to influence and manipulate the inclinations of people who aren't allowed access to information of this material (classified, discouraged in popular culture, relegated to myth/conspiracy/New Age philosophy), much less debate on these matters?

There isn't. Granted the strategy presented in this news story is a very general one and will serve to flow the juices of individuals who most likely will be inclined regardless, but it's all about reading between the lines in this case.

The playing field is not level.......To what extent is that relevant to ATSNN readers?

[edit on 7-8-2005 by MemoryShock]

Addendum

From the Department of DefenseDictionary of Military and Associated Terms.....As Amended Through August 31, 2005...

perception management—
Actions to convey and/or deny selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning as well as to intelligence systems and leaders at all levels to influence official estimates, ultimately resulting in foreign behaviors and official actions favorable to the originator’s objectives. In various ways, perception management combines truth projection, operations security, cover and deception, and psychological operations.

Page 407

psychlogical operations-
Planned Operations to convey selected information and indicators to foriegn audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foriegn governments, organizations, groups, and individuals. The purpose of psychological operations is to induce or reinforce foriegn attitudes and behavior favorable to the originator's objectives. Also called PSYOP. See also overt peacetime psychlogical operations programs; perception management.

Page 432

www.dtic.mil...

A Thank You for Majic for indirectly providing the way towards the provided link.....in my opinion, a valuable resource for those who want to take a look at how the DoD defines their own. A quick perusal will showcase the many subtle and seemingly disconnected aspects of their goals.

I chose to addendum in this regard because I feel it is relevant. We already have two posts dismissing the implications of the headline story as not only benefitial, but not at all wrong in any way shape or form. But I still contend that this is a very relevant news story and the attention payed to it in its initial go around was far below its importance. We see in the definitions from the DoD dictionary the capacity for the military to institute efforts whose objective is to influence the behaviour and attitudes of foriegn indiviuals, groups and governments. It is stipulated in the definitions that the applications are directed at foriegn entities but this very news story contradicts that assertion. Indeed, by merely stipulating 'foriegn audiences', the definition is performing a kind of perception management....by affecting the objective reasoning of the reader in the from of offering a given (a definition for all intents and purposes is supposed to be a fundamental breakdown of the term, concept, etc.....but the term foriegn would seem to negate any inclination to include domestic efforts).

And there are many who will read this that will accept the motives of the government as they are stated by the government. Even in the face of what here happens to be a contradiction of definition and application....

We here at ATS and ATSNN spend many hours dissecting current events and potential intricacies.....attempting to discern the motives of those behind the curtain and connecting the dots as we see them in order to formulate not only a working comprehension of the string of events that have resulted in current events, but where we are headed next........This is a reminder that the dots as we see them have in some cases already been considered and have been presented in such a way as to place some of us well behind their schedule......

In the words of Thomas Pynchon.....

"If they can get us to ask the wrong questions, then they don't have to worry about the answers."

Ok, believe it or not I am in full support of this. Why? There's a couple of reasons why I support this.

First reason is that when I look around I see very few people my age interested in science. That and with declining test scores I'm a bit nervous about America's technical advantage forty years from now.

Second reason is that science fiction these days is just that, but without the science. It's been years since I've seen a movie that actually incorporated real science. Very few movies these days seem to be shooting for some actual realism. Seriously, I'm supporting this even if it only produces better movies. Because let's face it, when's the last time you saw a sci-fi movie with actual science involved?

There really is nothing new, much propaganda has come out of Hollywood over the years and also fiction novels.

The use of fiction and storytelling has been used for centuries to get a point across, or to entice the masses..