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.

 

Propagandists....paid professionals on ATS?

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
i also should say that you dont even have to be a good writer to qualify






So true.




posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 07:10 AM
link   
How could a member or even the staff know for certain that another member is a paid lobbyist , propagandist or agent? Unless there's a straight up confession, there's no way to know for sure, imo.

I'm not saying there's not any, I'm just interested to see why some of you guys think you know who the paid propagandists on ATS are.

Sporty

[edit on 24/7/2006 by SportyMB]



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Well if ATS or any other of her sister sites, make the people who want us to swallow everything they tell us and never question anything feel threaten in any way by us members who freely exchange our frank views and opinions about anything and everything we feel like. Then fair play to ATS and her membersfor daring to question the acceptable dribble that is spouted day in day out by the press and media.

If they paid propagandists are trying to sell us the offical party line, then if i was their employers, after seeing the results of the ATS survey i would ask for a refund as they dont seem to be sawying anybody.



so a message to you people if you are on here, if you really have nothing better to do they try and stop freedom of thought and speech, you will never succeed as long as there are people willing to question everything and DENY Ignorance. hope your pay chq get lost in the mail.

rant over,

ps does it pay well ? and were do i apply ( i can change the system from within)



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 08:32 AM
link   
Get paid to rant and read about topics you are interested in all day? Sounds like an ideal job...



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
Call me paranoid but I am pretty certain there are spooks on ATS.
I can think of at least 2 who work for the gov, and one who works for Boeing



Working for Boeing doesn't make a person a spook. My husband signed up
here about a month ago. He works for Boeing and he's no
'spook'.
Others who post here and happen to work for the government
in some form doesn't automatically make them spooks. A 'spook' is CIA and
has an agenda. I only see one poster on here with an agenda ... and that
person is a radical lefty with notorious anti-American postings which means
that person certainly isn't CIA.

So yes, I'll call you paranoid (but I'm saying it nicely
)


[edit on 7/24/2006 by FlyersFan]



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Others who post here and happen to work for the government
in some form doesn't automatically make them spooks.


True. Oh noes, teh postal workers and coast guards with their hidden agendas.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by benevolent tyrant
Do you believe that such paid professional propagandists exist right here at ATS?


Short answer - no. I don't think the government can be bothered paying people
to sit at a computer and continually chat on obscure internet sites. This site is
fun, but to think it's anything more than that is egotistical. It's not a threat to
the government and it doesn't shape world or country opinions. It's just fun.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Others who post here and happen to work for the government
in some form doesn't automatically make them spooks.


Great post FF
, but to say that there's no chance of the feds monitoring ATS is a real blind statement, imo.



A 'spook' is CIA

A spook, imo, is anyone that is employed by an intelligence agency (any country) and takes part in covert, illegal or hush-hush activities. Doesn't have to be the CIA, could be the NSA, DOD, Mossad, FSB, SSPS, etc...

[edit on 24/7/2006 by SportyMB]

[edit on 24/7/2006 by SportyMB]



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 11:26 AM
link   

by benevolent tyrant: "Sometimes, if a point is made well enough, the philosophy that an "average joe" might hold could be swayed and that is, in itself, a victory for the propagandist. It's called disinformation and often, by blurring the truth, by phrasing things in a certain manner, by presenting arguments which, on the surface might seem plausible, hearts and minds can be won."


REPLY: While what you write is correct, there seems to be some confusion concerning semantic definitions. "Propaganda" and "misinformation" are not one and the same.
"Propaganda" is, more often than not, truth, facts and/or evidence as it/they relate to any given issue.

"Misinformation" is information that is incorrect. "Disinformation" is basically the same thing.

"Swaying" someone, or "winning hearts and minds", seems somewhat disingenuous, because it does not describe the process of learning something new by weighing both sides of an issue, the evidence/facts provided, and making a rational decision. So, if someone learns enough of an opposing view that challenges their belief, and they "change their mind" about a given issue, that's a bad thing? It's happened to me, and I'm sure others here as well.

What I've seen a lot of is no matter what facts/evdence is presented, it's never enough for some people. A steadfast refusal to change one's mind, no matter what, is hardly a learning experience, and wastes a lot of space and time for everyone concerned.

Saying "I was wrong" is one of the most valuable lessons one can learn.




by flyers fan: "... and that person is a radical lefty with notorious anti-American postings which means that person certainly isn't CIA.


REPLY: Considering that some in the intelligence community constantly leak secret information, that hardly seems to be true at all.

"It is a common fact that within a capitalist country, an individual, through determination, hard work and a good education, can become successful. In the USA, it is usual to refer to an individual like John D Rockefeller as someone who rose 'from rags to riches'. To complete the moral of the Rockefeller success story, it would be necessary to fill in the details on all the millions of people who, thanks to individual liberty and freedom, were provided jobs to become a multi-millionaire. The acquisition of wealth is not due to hard work alone, as it also requires one to be educated, and not a little common sense." Edit by Z-1

[edit on 24-7-2006 by zappafan1]



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by zappafan1
A steadfast refusal to change one's mind, no matter what, is hardly a learning experience, and wastes a lot of space and time for everyone concerned.

Saying "I was wrong" is one of the most valuable lessons one can learn.



well said and it can't be stated enough.

That's why I quoted it



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by SportyMB



A 'spook' is CIA

A spook, imo, is anyone that is employed by an intelligence agency (any country) and takes part in covert, illegal or hush-hush activities. Doesn't have to be the CIA, could be the NSA, DOD, Mossad, FSB, SSPS, etc...




Whoa. Nations are bit players in modern politics.

And industry is THE major player in espionage today - ever heard of "industrial espionage"?

FYI - Your average international corporation has a bigger "intelligence" budget than most nations' GDP's...

But the money to pay "agents" for planting disinformation in the public realm probably comes out of marketing and public relations budgets - also bigger than most nations' GDP's...






posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Flyersfan,

There are most certainly websites out there offering such jobs. I could use the money but i couldnt be bothered with the nonsense.
Besides, it would have to be something i really believed and not just a puppet for some branch of the gov.
There's enough of those already.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 12:41 PM
link   
(rant)
Spooks on ATS?
They should die of Gonorrhoea and burn in hell!
(rant off)

Personally we should pitty them. They are even more pathetic than we are.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Really:


...most of the money to pay "agents" for planting disinformation in the public realm comes out of international corporations' marketing and public relations budgets - which are bigger than most nations' GDP's...





posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Many of you guy said what I wanted to say this not a problem cause many of my fellow ats-er no matter what Deny ignorance in all level we change are minds time to time. But we change are mind when the proper proof is presented but many of us is not stupid and probably will not be swayed by there rant no matter how well put it is. There are some who will be swayed but that there choice and the reason is most likely because they don't want to believe what are government is doing. These guy can't sway a true ats-er so if you propagandists are reading this your wasting your time preaching to us try all you want you will all ways lose here.



[edit on 24-7-2006 by El Che]



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by SportyMB

Others who post here and happen to work for the government
in some form doesn't automatically make them spooks.


Great post FF
, but to say that there's no chance of the feds monitoring ATS is a real blind statement, imo.


I don't know about ATS. I do know that Daily KOS and Fark have full-time monitoring. Your tax dollars are going to a handful of guys in cubicles across the DC area, to read Fark. I don't know about the CIA, but the Feebs, SS and DIA do monitor both.

Why?...well the Feds are after political commentary that has phrase matching to known 'subversives'...in other words could DomoKunII be Abdul Alshabbaz the mad bomber.

The Secret Service prowls the political commentary looking for the odd comment that goes beyond "chimpy mcflightsuit" and crosses the border into "I think I'll get a machete and pay him a visit".

DIA, well, they're looking for guys that are either
(1) active military
(2) ex-mil with a happenin' MOS and NDAs that are still running
(3) aerospace and civilian/military crossover workers in secure projects
(4) people on the other team trolling for 1-3

and what they're looking for here is people that are reading some of these threads and making comments they shouldn't. Or people in category 4 openly soliciting them. Sometimes it's a big temptation to make corrections to the commentary flow based on your personal work history, and there are actually guys that look for that and solicit classified info. Call it spying by forum.

For whatever reason, Fark is a hotbed of military that just don't admit to it (often). And a lot of them are active bubbleheads and various SOCOM branches that hit the site when they're back at base. There's a big grab bag of DISA, SPADOC, DOE and DIA guys too. So the military intelligence branches scour the posts looking for the odd bit of info leakage.

If ATS is getting a lot of attention, the three amigos will know, because they will have been asked for the membership data, although they're not supposed to tell you.

[edit on 24-7-2006 by Tom Bedlam]



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 02:27 PM
link   
I dont think theres any paid advertisers here.

But while were onthe subject of advertising, totally unrelated.




If theres one thing I love on a hot day its a nice, cold, refreshing Pepsi. Theres nothing better then pulling it out of the freezer and taking a refreshing gulp of that cola flavor that never seems to go away.

Mmhmmmmm, pepsi.




posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 02:58 PM
link   
isn't it possible that these "propagandists" are really just people with opinions different than your own?

just because somebody expresses an unpopular point of view doesn't mean that person is a Government agent, even if the opinion expressed is the gov't party line.

i'd have to see a hell of a lot of evidence before i'd believe that ANY of these threads, no matter how bone-headed or off-the-wall, are the product of federal funding.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Parallelogram
isn't it possible that these "propagandists" are really just people with opinions different than your own?

just because somebody expresses an unpopular point of view doesn't mean that person is a Government agent, even if the opinion expressed is the gov't party line.

i'd have to see a hell of a lot of evidence before i'd believe that ANY of these threads, no matter how bone-headed or off-the-wall, are the product of federal funding.


I am NOT referring to ATS members who simply are expressing their opinions. That is to be expected and desired at a place like Above Top Secret. After all, ATS members love to express themselves, state their opinions and discuss, debate and even argue with other ATS members (in a civil manner, of course). It's one of the reasons that many ATS ers are here. What I am referring to are people who are paid professions who lurk at sites like ATS to monitor opinion and to attempt to sway beliefs using a variety of tactics such as disinformation, carefully crafted arguments and imaginary scenarios which are deliberately loaded to confuse and, perhaps dilute issues (a simple example of this is posing a question like "does John Kerry or George Bush still beat his wife?).

You might not be aware of "professional" propaganda companies such as Netvocates. Although this is a private company that works for corporations and industry, much of what Netvocates does is exactly what I am suggesting; paid professionals working to monitor and poll opinions, pros and cons, and who try to "enlighten" others of the merits of their product, service or, even, political stance.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 03:34 PM
link   
Maybe we SHOULD have people pointing fingers. When the finger is pointed at you (knowing you're innocent), you'll know who the paranoid few are.


I've heard of people getting paid for presenting certain points of view on blogs. I'm guessing that would include message boards as well. In fact I think it was reported on the local news a few months back.

Paid to Blog


Murphy is launching PayPerPost.com, which will automate such hookups between advertisers and bloggers and thus codify a new frontier of product placement. Advertisers pay to post details about their "opportunity," specifying, among other things, how they want bloggers to write about, say, a new shoe, if they want photos to be included, and whether they'll pay only for positive mentions. Bloggers who abide by the rules get paid; heavily trafficked blogs may command premium rates. Those seeking to subvert PayPerPost from within can't: No pornographic or "illicit" content is accepted.


Frankly I don't care who posts what opinion. Without proof or fact you'll have a tough time swaying my opinion.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join