4 ms·

>invalidate news organizations It should also be mentioned that this has been Putin's strategy since he's been in power: blur the line between political/histo

>invalidate news organizations It should also be mentioned that this has been Putin's strategy since he's been in power: blur the line between political/historical fact and fiction, and exploit the ambiguities that arise. Adam Curtis' film _Hypernormalization_ provides quite a bit of insight into this strategy and its consequences.

cat199 8y ago
See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin
mistermann 8y ago
Glad to see this comment has risen from the [Dead]. As always, I would encourage HNers to think critically and fight bad language/ideas with better language/ideas, rather than downvoting or reporting anything that conflicts with your personal opinions. Say what you will about Adam Curtis, he's no Alex Jones, which I hope would be obvious from his Wikipedia entry and filmography below. I heard a lot about Hypernormalization online and finally gave in and watched it. I almost gave up 20 minutes in or so as there's no doubt it has a conspiracy theory feel to it, but am I glad I hung in there as it gets much, much better as it progresses. I found the portions on the history of Syria and the US Government's on again, off again, conveniently malleable relationship with Muammar Gaddafi particularly interesting. I should also note, this documentary isn't a one-sided hit piece by any means, there's something for people of all political stripes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis#Filmography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis#Filmography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation
- presscast 8y ago
  >I almost gave up 20 minutes in or so as there's no doubt it has a conspiracy theory feel to it Agreed. Despite posting the parent comment, I'm not a huge fan of Adam Curtis because I feel like his ideas are often a bit wishy-washy and lacking in analytical rigor. The point at which I almost gave up on Hypernormalization was when the narrator basically declares the Raegan administration retreated from the Middle East because it was "too complicated". No explanation, no analysis of _why_ it was too complicated... nothing. That said, the film left a lasting impression. I've decided to take it as something more holistic/descriptive than analytical/proscriptive, and even though I find much of it unconvincing, I think he does describe a few phenomena quite well.

cat199 8y ago

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin

mistermann 8y ago

Glad to see this comment has risen from the [Dead]. As always, I would encourage HNers to think critically and fight bad language/ideas with better language/ideas, rather than downvoting or reporting anything that conflicts with your personal opinions. Say what you will about Adam Curtis, he's no Alex Jones, which I hope would be obvious from his Wikipedia entry and filmography below. I heard a lot about Hypernormalization online and finally gave in and watched it. I almost gave up 20 minutes in or so as there's no doubt it has a conspiracy theory feel to it, but am I glad I hung in there as it gets much, much better as it progresses. I found the portions on the history of Syria and the US Government's on again, off again, conveniently malleable relationship with Muammar Gaddafi particularly interesting. I should also note, this documentary isn't a one-sided hit piece by any means, there's something for people of all political stripes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis#Filmography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis#Filmography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation

presscast 8y ago
>I almost gave up 20 minutes in or so as there's no doubt it has a conspiracy theory feel to it Agreed. Despite posting the parent comment, I'm not a huge fan of Adam Curtis because I feel like his ideas are often a bit wishy-washy and lacking in analytical rigor. The point at which I almost gave up on Hypernormalization was when the narrator basically declares the Raegan administration retreated from the Middle East because it was "too complicated". No explanation, no analysis of _why_ it was too complicated... nothing. That said, the film left a lasting impression. I've decided to take it as something more holistic/descriptive than analytical/proscriptive, and even though I find much of it unconvincing, I think he does describe a few phenomena quite well.