It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate... It is the job of a disinfo artist to interfere with these evaluations... to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not... or to propose alternative solutions leading away from the truth. Often, by simply impeding and slowing down the (evaluation) process through disinformation tactics, a level of victory is assured because apathy increases with time and rhetoric.
Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil
2. Become incredulous and indignant
3. Create rumor mongers
4. Use a straw man
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling, ridicule
6. Hit and Run
7. Question motives
8. Invoke authority
9. Play Dumb
10. Associate opponent charges with old news
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions
12. Enigmas have no solution
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic
14. Demand complete solutions
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses
17. Change the subject
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad
19. Ignore facts, demand impossible proofs
20. False evidence
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor
22. Manufacture a new truth
23. Create bigger distractions
24. Silence critics
Eight Traits of The Disinformationalist
6. Artificial Emotions
8. Newly Discovered: Time Constant
Coercive persuasion and thought reform are alternate names for programs of social influence capable of producing substantial behavior and attitude change through the use of coercive tactics, persuasion, and/or interpersonal and group-based influence manipulations (Schein 1961; Lifton 1961). Such programs have also been labeled "brainwashing" (Hunter 1951), a term more often used in the media than in scientific literature. However identified, these programs are distinguishable from other elaborate attempts to influence behavior and attitudes, to socialize, and to accomplish social control. Their distinguishing features are their totalistic qualities (Lifton 1961), the types of influence procedures they employ, and the organization of these procedures into three distinctive subphases of the overall process (Schein 1961; Ofshe and Singer 1986). The key factors that distinguish coercive persuasion from other training and socialization schemes are:
1. The reliance on intense interpersonal and psychological attack to destabilize an individual's sense of self to promote compliance
2. The use of an organized peer group
3. Applying interpersonal pressure to promote conformity
4. The manipulation of the totality of the person's social environment to stabilize behavior once modified
Thought-reform programs have been employed in attempts to control and indoctrinate individuals, societal groups (e.g., intellectuals), and even entire populations. Systems intended to accomplish these goals can vary considerably in their construction.
Coercive Persuasion and Attitude Change. Encyclopedia of Sociology Volume 1, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York
By Richard J. Ofshe, Ph.D. Online Here
Originally posted by HowardRoark
You many of those tactics used on both sides of every issue on ATS.
In reality, they aren’t really “Disinformation tactics,’ so much as they are simply bad debating techniques.
The Logical Fallacies Index
Fallacies of Distraction
* From Ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false
* Slippery Slope: a series of increasingly unacceptable consequences is drawn
Appeals to Motives in Place of Support
Changing the Subject
* Attacking the Person:
* Appeal to Authority:
* Hasty Generalization: the sample is too small to support an inductive generalization about a population
* Unrepresentative Sample: the sample is unrepresentative of the sample as a whole
* False Analogy: the two objects or events being compared are relevantly dissimilar
* Slothful Induction: the conclusion of a strong inductive argument is denied despite the evidence to the contrary
* Fallacy of Exclusion: evidence which would change the outcome of an inductive argument is excluded from consideration
Fallacies Involving Statistical Syllogisms
* Accident: a generalization is applied when circumstances suggest that there should be an exception
* Converse Accident : an exception is applied in circumstances where a generalization should apply
* Post Hoc: because one thing follows another, it is held to cause the other
* Joint effect: one thing is held to cause another when in fact they are both the joint effects of an underlying cause
* Insignificant: one thing is held to cause another, and it does, but it is insignificant compared to other causes of the effect
* Wrong Direction: the direction between cause and effect is reversed
* Complex Cause: the cause identified is only a part of the entire cause of the effect
Missing the Point
* Begging the Question: the truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises
* Irrelevant Conclusion: an argument in defense of one conclusion instead proves a different conclusion
* Straw Man: the author attacks an argument different from (and weaker than) the opposition's best argument
Fallacies of Ambiguity
* Equivocation: the same term is used with two different meanings
* Amphiboly: the structure of a sentence allows two different interpretations
* Accent: the emphasis on a word or phrase suggests a meaning contrary to what the sentence actually says
* Affirming the Consequent: any argument of the form: If A then B, B, therefore A
* Denying the Antecedent: any argument of the form: If A then B, Not A, thus Not B
* Inconsistency: asserting that contrary or contradictory statements are both true
Fallacies of Explanation
Fallacies of Definition
The Logical Fallacies Index.
But I also think that ATS is an important source of information, a "pulse" of the nation, AND a venue for disseminating information - so we will see our share of disinformation and other agents.
Originally posted by Produkt
Look at all this "important" source of information. You can find it anywhere on the internet. Where do you think half this stuff come's from? People citing other people's information. No one here on ATS has posted anything new that hasn't been seen somewhere else online, in the news, in a book, in a newspaper, in grandma's panties drawer.
Originally posted by soficrow
...To be honest, I know I have some of these traits and follow some of these rules - quite innocently I promise. I've learned everything I know here at ATS.
Originally posted by nightwing
I would think the best way to approach a solution to disinformation is to give specific examples of who did what to whom, how it worked, and then arrive at preventative measures.
...Could it be that what is really needed is a complex
set of rules that includes everybody ? I think I see, this is a "noone left behind" thing.