4 ms·

Have been thinking of something similar lately: A fictitious newspaper with headlines that illustrate the propaganda aspect of our news orgs. Headlines like:

Have been thinking of something similar lately: A fictitious newspaper with headlines that illustrate the propaganda aspect of our news orgs. Headlines like: - Foreign leader lacks dignity - US institutions solid - Life in the 3rd world is horrible - Life in the 3rd world is meaningless/scary - Something some politician said was important. - Politician's legacy is important - Foreign institutions/economy shaky - Foreign unemployment soars - Life in foreign city dangerous - Election in foreign country rigged - Arcane details about silly political spat matter - US institutions beyond reproach - Firms are not beyond reproach - Sports matter - Storm with name nears - Three cheers for successful US company - You know buzzwords so you are informed about science - You know buzzwords so you are informed about technology - Token story about the EU

alexose 12y ago
Given that many legitimate news articles are generated programmatically, it might just be a matter of publishing the templates :)
mason240 12y ago
That seems so cynical you just as easily pass it off as a parody of being cynical.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- grandalf 12y ago
  I'm not cynical. It only seems cynical if you believe those things to be true. We do not have much official government propaganda in the US simply b/c we don't need it -- the private firms deliver a mix of stories designed to make the reader feel like life is pretty good while feeling informed, justified ire about this and that.
  - Chlorus 12y ago
    Here are the headlines on washingtonpost.com[0]. They sure do look like they're making blindly xenophobic, nationalistic claims to bolster my faith in the government /s : Obama scraps bid to raise taxes on ‘529’ plans How one family went from no debt to owing more than $1 million *Why the snow forecast for New York City was so bad, and what should be done "US institution beyond reproach" You don't read many newspaper articles, do you? Ever hear of this thing called 'Watergate'? [0]http://www.washingtonpost.com/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/ as it was on 1/27/2015 @ 6:00PM UTC-7
karmacondon 12y ago
Isn't that called "The Onion"? As they say about programming, the best way to complain about software is to write software. If you don't like what the media is reporting then start your own news organization of whatever kind, including satire. To complete the exercise, put years of your life into building circulation, attracting talented writers, dealing with technology costs and issues, creating and maintaining relationships and generally doing the things necessary to scale a business. Then after all of that investment, make the decision between "listening to your customers and giving them what they want" and "sticking it to the man". The majority of media organizations don't select stories on the basis of what will be the most effective form of propaganda, but based on what they think people want to read about and discuss. Any business that has the mindset of telling it's customers what they want instead of listening to them and responding to their needs is going to have a rough go of it, including media businesses. You may not like the results, but any fault that you perceive lies more with your fellow citizens than it does with the organizations that deliver news to them.
- grandalf 12y ago
  I don't disagree with your points at all. It is interesting that the market demands this kind of news. I guess it's not surprising that since so much policy is predicated on American Exceptionalism, that the daily paper need only retell that story again and again so that we can all feel comfortable that we have the first-world lives that we deserve. As long as others have it worse, we are doing well. I guess it's similar to the public hunger for embarrassing stories about celebrities, the stuff on Jerry Springer, etc. Most people don't realize that those stories they are reading in the NYT about womens' rights in the 3rd world are the same kind of indulgence.
- coldtea 12y ago
  >As they say about programming, the best way to complain about software is to write software. If you don't like what the media is reporting then start your own news organization of whatever kind, including satire. To complete the exercise, put years of your life into building circulation, attracting talented writers, dealing with technology costs and issues, creating and maintaining relationships and generally doing the things necessary to scale a business. Then after all of that investment, make the decision between "listening to your customers and giving them what they want" and "sticking it to the man". This seems to me like a very American conception of the issue (culturally I mean). The "continental" idea is that the Press (news) is not supposed to be a business first and foremost, but a kind of service to the republic first, and a business second. The business aspect (ads, etc) is tolerated in the degree that the Press is independent, informative, helps decocracy and transparency, etc. If a news outlet owner can't make money off of it, he can always not do it. Doing it badly, untruthfully, link-baity etc, is not something that's really OK (e.g. because "they have to make money" -- pimps have to make money too, that's no excuse), but something that is an example of a sick Press. >The majority of media organizations don't select stories on the basis of what will be the most effective form of propaganda, but based on what they think people want to read about and discuss. That's also not 100% accurate. Will a lot of stores are run like that, other aspects (like their stance in foreign politic issues, bills etc) are more often than not based on the interests of the owner or sponsors of the outlet, and in lots of cases downright propaganda (from the crude Operation Mockinbird ways onwards to today: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird ).

alexose 12y ago

Given that many legitimate news articles are generated programmatically, it might just be a matter of publishing the templates :)

mason240 12y ago

That seems so cynical you just as easily pass it off as a parody of being cynical.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
grandalf 12y ago
I'm not cynical. It only seems cynical if you believe those things to be true. We do not have much official government propaganda in the US simply b/c we don't need it -- the private firms deliver a mix of stories designed to make the reader feel like life is pretty good while feeling informed, justified ire about this and that.
- Chlorus 12y ago
  Here are the headlines on washingtonpost.com[0]. They sure do look like they're making blindly xenophobic, nationalistic claims to bolster my faith in the government /s : Obama scraps bid to raise taxes on ‘529’ plans How one family went from no debt to owing more than $1 million *Why the snow forecast for New York City was so bad, and what should be done "US institution beyond reproach" You don't read many newspaper articles, do you? Ever hear of this thing called 'Watergate'? [0]http://www.washingtonpost.com/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/ as it was on 1/27/2015 @ 6:00PM UTC-7

karmacondon 12y ago

Isn't that called "The Onion"? As they say about programming, the best way to complain about software is to write software. If you don't like what the media is reporting then start your own news organization of whatever kind, including satire. To complete the exercise, put years of your life into building circulation, attracting talented writers, dealing with technology costs and issues, creating and maintaining relationships and generally doing the things necessary to scale a business. Then after all of that investment, make the decision between "listening to your customers and giving them what they want" and "sticking it to the man". The majority of media organizations don't select stories on the basis of what will be the most effective form of propaganda, but based on what they think people want to read about and discuss. Any business that has the mindset of telling it's customers what they want instead of listening to them and responding to their needs is going to have a rough go of it, including media businesses. You may not like the results, but any fault that you perceive lies more with your fellow citizens than it does with the organizations that deliver news to them.

grandalf 12y ago
I don't disagree with your points at all. It is interesting that the market demands this kind of news. I guess it's not surprising that since so much policy is predicated on American Exceptionalism, that the daily paper need only retell that story again and again so that we can all feel comfortable that we have the first-world lives that we deserve. As long as others have it worse, we are doing well. I guess it's similar to the public hunger for embarrassing stories about celebrities, the stuff on Jerry Springer, etc. Most people don't realize that those stories they are reading in the NYT about womens' rights in the 3rd world are the same kind of indulgence.
coldtea 12y ago
>As they say about programming, the best way to complain about software is to write software. If you don't like what the media is reporting then start your own news organization of whatever kind, including satire. To complete the exercise, put years of your life into building circulation, attracting talented writers, dealing with technology costs and issues, creating and maintaining relationships and generally doing the things necessary to scale a business. Then after all of that investment, make the decision between "listening to your customers and giving them what they want" and "sticking it to the man". This seems to me like a very American conception of the issue (culturally I mean). The "continental" idea is that the Press (news) is not supposed to be a business first and foremost, but a kind of service to the republic first, and a business second. The business aspect (ads, etc) is tolerated in the degree that the Press is independent, informative, helps decocracy and transparency, etc. If a news outlet owner can't make money off of it, he can always not do it. Doing it badly, untruthfully, link-baity etc, is not something that's really OK (e.g. because "they have to make money" -- pimps have to make money too, that's no excuse), but something that is an example of a sick Press. >The majority of media organizations don't select stories on the basis of what will be the most effective form of propaganda, but based on what they think people want to read about and discuss. That's also not 100% accurate. Will a lot of stores are run like that, other aspects (like their stance in foreign politic issues, bills etc) are more often than not based on the interests of the owner or sponsors of the outlet, and in lots of cases downright propaganda (from the crude Operation Mockinbird ways onwards to today: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird ).