(r)educed Communication

NYT and other companies

Where I explain how having only a few companies communicating with the public is connected with reduction of communication. Or, perhaps the ‘N.Y. Times’ will “save us” using the method of their long-windedness???

NYT is, as some people say, the official organ of the state. Also, you could say that all the major newspapers together could be called the official state organs of propaganda—they all have pleased the cosmic hoopla-master, for the showing complete ideological agreement. And I might add that the various points made by the organs of state should always exhibit the same kind of ideological clarity as the great Russian organ, Pravda, did. (So it’s kinda like the same thing—!)

This is the same agreement as newspapers had under Russia or any other uniform communist state (or ideological state). Well, I guess that is how it is. They all require the same uniformity, and to get that one must push for similar ideological principles.

Now, what about the word here I am using: which “organ” of the body has a “media” job, amongst all the other organs? (In the body, the media is in the eyes and ears I would think….)

Now when it comes to news media, the “media organ” has the job of lowering the amounts of information we get. Thus, by their thinking, the average denizen of the country should get less information about the world. Does that sound scary?

Or is that what newspapers have always done? Or is it that the GOOD newspapers were in the 1830s? Any time in my lifetime (amend that to: “since shortly after WWII” — maybe you could adjust that?) the news media was already toast.

They don’t deliver a full spectrum of information on what is going on. Rather they deliver a few basic ideas: “Israel dropped a bomb” ; or, “Iran shot a missile volley” at somebody. Or: “Ukraine town taken (by Russia).” That’s it, that is all you get. That’s what the news is providing in terms of knowledge. So, this is the American public’s knowledge of the violence going on all over the world. With no moral judgement of course, so everyone gets a full trial with angel judges, and with their juries of people from a Norman Rockwell painting. That is what is on order, and all the folks running things in the United States are ever going to allow. There is you good old dependable, American ABC and CBS that you still believe in.

Or, another possibility: We get a message from the solemn “government spokesperson” but really he is speaking words nobody understands. But the priority is to reduce the spectrum. They also want to compress the nuance. You will get just a few talking points. Generally, the idea is to tell people very little. Maybe there was a monsoon—? ~ or an unusual event? It was somewhere “else” in the world. Their goal is to compress the nuances into simple talking points. With fewer points of fact being reported, it is easier to manage this dangerous thing called the country.

I reckon there is hope there for them — that, if the total incoming information is managed or limited or controlled, constrained, filtered, transferred, made into slogans or “training programs” maybe THEN they will finally have full totalitarian control. They hope they can manage the U.S. (us!).

“We can get critics to go the fuck away. The -maybe - we’ll be able to rule, i.e. to manage to maintain

… ORDER

However, this did not work. It doesn’t work; it cannot work.
(The clown has a red nose)
It isn’t going to succeed. I wonder why these sorts of persons ever made the mistake of allowing the Internet to even exist. They probably just did not see that one coming either. These people ain’t too smart, that’s their big secret…

I am really not so sure they wanted the Internet.

Now you are at the end of your rope and you revert to

… IDEOLOGY

It will not work. Is that clear?
It’ll only lead to chaos and disaster.

          The ideological ‘Woke’ society terrifies me.