26 Alex Jones LIES Debunked

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   
It is simple. Jones markets to a demographic. The particular demographic is you. His subject is anything that draws that demographic in.That means some of what he reports will be true, some of it not true. And if it is not sensational enough, the Jones team can just manufacture, twist, and spin. It is no different than MSNBC or FOX or RT or ATS or any other for-profit media enterprise. In order to make a profit, you have to bring in consumers. Consumers are drawn to narratives and sensation. If you take away the specifics of his content, you can see his show is using the same template as any other media group. Content becomes filler and entertainment in between marketing messages. For cable news, it is cars and fast food. For the conspiracy circle, it is prep kits, gold, survival gear, etc.

You are a demographic. You are not exceptional. You are a consumer.




posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 01:25 PM
link   
LOL, I can't believe that the people still watch this asshat. NBC looks like a paragon of virtue compared to him.

Y2K, LOL

Alex Jones laughs all the way to the bank



posted on Sep, 12 2012 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by stanguilles7
 


couldnt have said it better myself. theres a generation of ppl nowadays (thanks to the web) that want or choose to believe the wild and crazy.



posted on Sep, 12 2012 @ 08:16 PM
link   
he's the rush limbaugh of conspiracy world

wish I had thought of it first, lol



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 09:01 AM
link   
So long as there are commonly accepted instances of conspiracy, things like Guy Fawkes, which no one in common doubts happened. There will always be validity for conspiracy.

Making a reasonable case for a claim has been the trouble. Too many go the lazy route of attaching a narrative that fits the physical observable story and fill in the gaps with presumption.

It is a slower and more disciplined route to only progress when one verifiable fact is attached to another. The acceptance of gaps is why the public dismisses most popularly supported theories.

And deriding everyone who ignores these claims as sheeple or zombies etc doesn't validate ourselves. We need to begin treating conspiracy theories precisely by its namesake. Theories that require intricate scientific discipline. And not be governed by impatient passion that leads to accusations that demand a presumption of knowledge others simply may not have or have acquired yet.

I have spent too much time and heard too many people make compelling arguments and indictments who failed to achieve a convincing argument because of its insistence on in verifiable information.

Moreover, I recognize the whole point of conspiracy is identifying that which has been deliberately concealed often with great pains and great resources. That is not good enough.The fault of all conspiracists if I may classify it as such is the approach.

Often we speak of heavily financed well resourced behemoths deploying nefarious machinations. We all collectively approach these great towers at its pinnacle.

Tactically speaking we must attack its at the very base, and begin the long and time consuming process of picking apart block for block.

To many times finite instances are wrapped up in large scale considerations as credence of the finite. This is the entire failure of most 9/11 claims. Compare this to the modern approach to JFK. Breaking it down in minutes, days, hours, months, letters, testimony, compare and contrast.

There are many looking at 9/11 now who are now patient and are only building a case in verified increments instead of saying the towers were demolished and then saying Bush. Now its and minute to minute narrative being built.

We must start from square one with all claims start at the incident in question and build as detailed a frame around it as possible without being sidetracked via going immediately to a supposed culprit.





new topics

top topics
 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join