1960's National Anthem Sign-Off With Subliminal Messaging

These things have been repeated throughout this thread, but since everyone seems to be skipping over them:

It is not creepy that sentence ends in a question mark, because it's a question. The first stanza asks the question:

Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

The only way they knew they had not lost the battle was to look and see if the flag was still standing. They are basically asking "Is the flag still flying over this free and brave country?".

It is only the first stanze that ends in a question mark. The other three stanzas end in an exclamation mark, answering this question:

'Tis the star-spangled banner! Oh long may it wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

Secondly, the author of this hoax signed their name in the subliminal messages. No, Naomi is not referencing MKNaomi. Why would they put the name of a classified project into a subliminal message? Subliminal messages only work if your brain can understand them. If the message is in a different language, or a word you don't know, it's not going to have any impact. It would be completely pointless and counterproductive to put the name of a top secret project which no one had heard of at the time into the video.

If that still doesn't convince you that the likelihood of this being a hoax far, far outweighs he possibility it's real, then really nothing will. There is no way to absolutely prove this never aired in 60s as some of you are asking. It's impossible to prove a negative, you can't seriously ask people to try to do that.

reply to post by Brotherman


piece o' cake to do it now.

don't even need a high end anything.

i can age a piece of vid, make it the same color as an old piece, and even mess up the music like it was old film track.

ain't gonna do it, tho and then say it's from anytime i want.

and i'm stupid!!

No wonder, theres so many religious, and government patriot nut jobs in the US.
But yeah, just imagine nowadays, all the religious and patriotic nut jobs now watch alex jones.
Look behind alex!
His TV's behind him are using subliminal messages againt your mind.

reply to post by Akasirus

Actually your comment about subliminals in foreign languages-- they can be quit effective if the same images are anchored to them. The unconscious does not think it words anyway, but in shapes and symbols, color...things like that. Most times a person is put in a deep trance, when they are brought back up, they are pretty quiet for a while. The reason being they are mentally translating the experience they just had into words so they can discuss it.

Example is I could anchor a word in any language to a specific image that invokes a feeling, like say...popcorn, warm steaming popcorn. I could show my subliminal clip to people speaking many different languages but NOT the language I used. Later I could write my subliminal word on the wall and most of those people would start thinking about and wanting popcorn, the very suggestible might even think they smell popcorn.

I use to have a friend that liked to use Portuguese triggers on his hypnosis clients because he got great enjoyment from the fact they still worked just fine even though the client had no clue what the word ment

Okay... firstly, Why would they place this on the end of the programing day sign off? Folks would be sleeping in front of their TV or take it as the signal to shut off their TV before the finish. Anyone who would actually stay up and watch the sign off and listen to the Naional Anthem most likely would already be an obeying, patriotic, God-fearing consumer so why brainwash the already converted?

Secondly... Subliminals do not work (or subliminal seduction or subliminal persuasion). And here is why...
*Everything is/would be subliminal, eg. Your watching TV and a train is off in the distance and barely audible wouldn't that subliminally place a train or traveling in your subconscious?
*Crickets outside your window are chirping as you watch the "Tonight Show" but you have the volume level set to only hear the TV above the din, would this indicate to your subconscious mind that Jay Leno's jokes are falling flat to a bored tired audience?
*Your watching a movie in a theater and the person next to you has stomach gurgles, does this make you suddenly feel hungry?

You see, everything would become part of the subliminal messages. The subliminals would included the real world happening right outside of your concentration or focus. Cars, clocks ticking, dogs barking, the reflection of the room you're in and yourself being reflected back at you from the TV or computer screen and whatever else is happening all would be noticed by your unconscious . Plus your mind would also be picking up apophenia, and random coincidence, patterns and imaginings.

Also, without personally or intimately knowing the subject (the person) the subliminal perpetrator would be playing a hit or miss type game with the subject's mind. As the perpetrator would not know what could possibly be offensive, tantalizing, repulsive, suggestive or indifferent to the subject. Thus, merely flashing or superimposing a word could possibly have the opposite effect than the supposed intended outcome depending on the subjects disposition, cultural identity, mood, history - etc.

Thirdly... A repeated myth (hoax) is there was a study done by flashing popcorn and soda pop during a film which resulted in more popcorn and soda sales (sometimes a percentage figure is stated, like popcorn sales rose18%), this never worked under a contolled situation or could be repeated under scientific testing. Back in the late 1950's James Vicary (a marketing researcher) said it worked but it was never proven to work in anyother study. Later, Wilson Key became famous with his "Clam Plate Orgy" (if i remember correctly it was on a Howard Johnson menu) and his book, "Subliminal Seduction", because of public outcry concerning subliminals and the popularity of books concerning the subject matter (especially with the rise of anti-corporatism/establishment in the 60s and 70s) the FCC ruled that subliminal advertising was an unfair and decietful practice and ruled advertisers couldn't use it. The FCC never said if they thought it worked not and didn't do any of their own studies.

Okay, let me add... Some confusion about the subject... Subliminal Priming has been shown to work in a limited way for people who already had/have a proclivity toward a subject. So if you show someone a brand name of an item subliminally and the person already wants to purchase a like item, seeing a particular brand will make them more likely to buy said brand. But this only works for the short term (before everything else starts flooding into your mind). This is why a corporation like COKE puts their brand all over and everywhere just waiting for the thirsty person to come along. But every other soft-drink company is doing the same thing so if there is any lag between the "subliminal priming" and purchase it is quickly canceled by the other's advertising and what ever else becomes distracting. (hey look a squirrel)

[all of what i've said above is coming from my perspective and study of the subject matter over the course of many years. i have been an accomplished artist for over 30 years and between 1988 to 1997 worked in advertising, film and television. A very dear friend of mine was a mural artist for Disneyworld (and other corps.) and he would place hidden items in his works (not the sex stuff) as an inside joke among ourselves and some other friends. Sometimes subliminals in artwork is used to convey a feeling or emotion. PM me if you would like to discuss]

heres the original

www.fuzzymemories.tv...

4 min mark

Originally posted by trika3000

Secondly... Subliminals do not work (or subliminal seduction or subliminal persuasion). And here is why...
*Everything is/would be subliminal, eg. Your watching TV and a train is off in the distance and barely audible wouldn't that subliminally place a train or traveling in your subconscious?
*Crickets outside your window are chirping as you watch the "Tonight Show" but you have the volume level set to only hear the TV above the din, would this indicate to your subconscious mind that Jay Leno's jokes are falling flat to a bored tired audience?
*Your watching a movie in a theater and the person next to you has stomach gurgles, does this make you suddenly feel hungry?

I see your point however if our brains were to act upon every single stimuli , we would be overwhelmed by information and make us go crazy , so thats why our brain is the best filter for reality.
All of these noises dont have a subliminal effect as they are background . Your brain will automatically block them out as your conscious mind is not directly focusing on these.
Instead you are focusing your conscious mind on the images being sent to your optic nerve directly from the tv or screen.

Your brain is consciously fixed on that information , allowing any subliminal message to slip easily into your sub conscious in this way because the information is not being filtered.

Originally posted by sapien82

Originally posted by trika3000

Secondly... Subliminals do not work (or subliminal seduction or subliminal persuasion). And here is why...
*Everything is/would be subliminal, eg. Your watching TV and a train is off in the distance and barely audible wouldn't that subliminally place a train or traveling in your subconscious?
*Crickets outside your window are chirping as you watch the "Tonight Show" but you have the volume level set to only hear the TV above the din, would this indicate to your subconscious mind that Jay Leno's jokes are falling flat to a bored tired audience?
*Your watching a movie in a theater and the person next to you has stomach gurgles, does this make you suddenly feel hungry?

I see your point however if our brains were to act upon every single stimuli , we would be overwhelmed by information and make us go crazy , so thats why our brain is the best filter for reality.
All of these noises dont have a subliminal effect as they are background . Your brain will automatically block them out as your conscious mind is not directly focusing on these.
Instead you are focusing your conscious mind on the images being sent to your optic nerve directly from the tv or screen.

Your brain is consciously fixed on that information , allowing any subliminal message to slip easily into your sub conscious in this way because the information is not being filtered.

Isn't that contradictory? Also, subliminals are said not to be only optical but auditory too. If your brain is consciously fixed then that which is not consciously fixed could/would slip in, as everything else. Or as you said we filter out unneeded data the subliminals would be unneeded data. Either everything goes in (unconsciously ) subliminally or consciously. You said, ..."Your brain is consciously fixed on that information , allowing any subliminal message to slip easily into your sub conscious in this way because the information is not being filtered"... But it would fall into the catagory of everything else, unless some how you are suggesting the brain isn't filtering it, but then the brain in order to not filter it would recognize it and hence it wouldn't be subliminal. You can't have it both ways, it's either what your brain is fixed upon with everything being filtered out or it is unconsciously taking everything around you in. How would it selectively only take in the projected subliminals and not the random subliminals?

And an interesting thing to think about if subliminal messaging works... If you turn off your TV (or monitor) you can see your reflection on the screen, under bright light you can see the reflection without turning off the screen image, so the image of yourself is constantly there subliminally or just under the threshold of being consciously aware of it what effect would this have?

Plus as i kinda said, without personally knowing the subject and their tastes and predispositions etc. sublimation couldn't/wouldn't necessarily have the desired outcome. It would be hit or miss depending on the audience. Audience perception is why "targeting" and demographics is such a concern of marketing even when not about subliminal messages. (i gotta go right now so sorry if i don't get back to you right away)

Originally posted by GezinhoKiko
heres the original

www.fuzzymemories.tv...

4 min mark

Okay, this has been posted repeatedly throughout the thread, and I stupidly keep clicking on it hoping someone fixed the link this time....

IT DOES NOT WORK

This is what I get-

HTTP Error 404 - File or Directory not found -

The server encountered an internal error and was unable to complete your request. This error is generated by the server for this website and is not caused by your individual Internet provider.

Please e-mail the server administrator, at [email protected] and inform them of the time the error occurred.

More information about this error may be available in the server error log.

I don't think this was debunked in any sure way...... unless that link that doesn't work has a copy of the same message from the same time (not the 80's).

But I personally lean towards hoax because I also think that the effects used for the text were not being used yet at the time.

I do remember seeing this as a kid, but without any text. Since one authentic copy was found with text, that tells me there is more than one format that was used.


I wouldn't be surprised at all if this had been real though. The government was very interested in subliminal messaging in the 50's and 60's, and those messages there wouldn't have been seen as that scandalous at that time.
Everyone was worried about being brain washed by Commies, and would have seen this a fair tactic in face of that potential. There were uprisings happening, with the young, with women, with the blacks, that were being seen as threats to the society and individuals, much of the public was scared by this. I doubt many people would have even protested such an attempt at getting people under control at that time. My grandparents would have approved.

I remember when I was very little, and my mother explaining to me what subliminal messaging is, and how it is used in publicity and such, and in manipulating the masses.
Whether this was ever found to work or not (I think it does plant in the subconscious, but that our conscious awareness is what chooses what it will fish up from the subconscious and what it won't) is sort of irrelevant to whether or not they tried it, and whether or not the public came to believe it was effective! If people my moms age (the hippy) believed it worked and were suspicious, then that would have been exactly the moment they'd change the format to get rid of it so they don't catch it consciously.

That was early seventies, which indicates to me that the format of the sign off could have been altered at that point, after a try at subliminal messaging.

I still think this particular video is a hoax..... but just saying, there could have been such a sign off with those type of messages. It isn't a shocking or ridiculous concept.

Originally posted by neobludragon
The video on page 5 is from 1984, not from the 60's.

The video on page 5 IS from 1984. However the Star Spangled Banner montage was created in the 60's and used by WMAQ for it's sign off.

As to the "SSB" WMAQ used . . . it dated back to at least the 1960's.
Comment posted by W.B. on Friday, June 4th 2010 at 4:11pm.

Viewer Comments

This comment was made by the sites own Video Description Editor and Technical Historian: William Brown. ('W.B.' in the forums)

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d5d6f13a69f8.jpg[/atsimg]

This has been used since the 60's and it is what you are seeing in this 1984 airing on WMAQ.

Hope this puts things in perspective for you guys.

The error is that people think this was ONLY aired in the 60's. That's false.

I have sent an email to the all of the contacts at The Museum of Classic Chicago Television aka: FuzzyMemories.tv

I invited them to join the discussion.

There is more credential in these people than a youtube user who posted one video.

Hmmmmm..jury is out on this one for me still. I KNOW this happens all the time. If I remember correctly during the 2008 elections there instances of this.

I have a few questions. Are there any film editing buffs here? If so this is what I have to ask:

1. The text transition effect looks off. To me it looks new, meaning something created with today's editing software. Was the editing software able to do this then.

2. Would the letters shake such at this? The words seem to wobble. Clearly the words would be added in post so I am not sure why they would wobble so much. Its like they are trying to cover up the editing with forcing it to look old.

That is all for now.

reply to post by Radiobuzz


It looks like the youtube OP has responded: i.imgur.com...
From: www.youtube.com... just after the text "ATTENTION DEBUNKERS".

The clip as posted on YouTube also appears to have originally been in black-and-white, but colorized at key points. The film as run by WMAQ was in genuine color. The positions of the lines differed slightly between prints. Also, the print on YouTube had the lines in drop shadow, while they were overhead shadow with slight outline on the color print used by WMAQ. (Not to mention, on the WMAQ print, the lines of the song colored yellow.) Regardless of whether the subliminals on the YouTube print were authentic or not, the fact is that production companies would have made two different prints of such films - in B&W and color - in the early 1960's. WMAQ would've gotten the color print because they'd broadcast in color since the 1950's. Many stations (including, presumably, that Alabama station) were still broadcasting in B&W well into the 1970's. The colors on the WMAQ print were considerably more authentic and had more weight and dimension to them. The print put up by 'NAOMI19631963' evidently has the feel of something being artificially colorized. And some site mentioned that the "subliminals" version had more picture than the "non-subliminals." Well, that's 'cause the former was shot, and shown on the YouTube clip, in 1.37:1 aspect ratio, while WMAQ ran their print with the left and right side cut off owing to the 1.33:1 aspect ratio of NTSC television.

Originally posted by neobludragon
Clearly you didn't read what you posted cause if you had you woulda noticed this

This aired on local Chicago TV early Thursday, February 16th 1984 at 2:30am.

Edit: Forgot to mention, this thread is about the National anthem in the 1960's not the 1980's.

That WMAQ airing may've been 1984 - but they would've had that "SSB" film since the 1960's. And their print was in genuine color, unlike the highly colorized B&W print put up on YouTube.

Many thanks to WBhist for joining the discussion.

May I include the email you have sent in response?

reply to post by WBhist


Hey, and welcome. I presume you are THE W.B from Fuzzy Memories.
Thanks for your insight.

Is it possible that the (dare I say) original SUBLIMINAL version was taken from another source other than Fuzzy Memories?

To me it looks like a different version floating around was altered and not the segment from fuzzy memories.

Thanks for discussing and sharing your professional thoughts with us.

Your expertise in this subject far supersedes the silly children hear screaming fowl.

~Cluck~

Originally posted by cluckerspud
Hey, and welcome. I presume you are THE W.B from Fuzzy Memories.
Thanks for your insight.

Is it possible that the (dare I say) original SUBLIMINAL version was taken from another source other than Fuzzy Memories?

To me it looks like a different version floating around was altered and not the segment from fuzzy memories.

Thanks for discussing and sharing your professional thoughts with us.

Your expertise in this subject far supersedes the silly children hear screaming fowl.

I am one and the same. It's possible that the "subliminal" print put up on YouTube was genuine but highly doctored - both in its obvious colorization and the aforementioned "subliminals." As I said, in the early 1960's (when this "SSB" film was made), there would have been two versions made, one in B&W and another in color. I can guarantee you that that "subliminal" print was different from the one WMAQ ran (and FuzzyMemories put up).

Makes you wonder what they can do with today's technology...