Information control - a discussion thread.

[admin2]

It appears that some people on this site have just woken up and realised what propaganda is. Over most of the world there has been government control of information for many years. In the UK we had a ‘Ministry of Information’ up to the second world war, and copious ‘D-notices’ to media and, no doubt, many ‘I say old chap’ phone calls to editors. This control, rightly or wrongly, was judged to be necessary. Often hindsight shows that the suppression was wrong, and there are numerous examples of people being punished for speaking out or refusing to follow ‘orders’ where such punishment has later been shown to be wrong and rescinded (in some cases too late).

The digital age, however, brings new issues. The rapid and wide spread of ‘free speech’ and social media has meant that ‘dissent’ or dangerous information can be rapidly and easily disseminated, and, of course, controlled.

In the UK, the ‘Counter-Disinformation Unit’ was formed in government to control this (I think in 2018). To quote from an official government reply in May 2020

“To date, the CDU has stood-up three times, during the 2019 European Elections (17 April 2019 to 31 May 2019), 2019 UK General Election (21 October 2019 to 20 December 2019), and the current COVID-19 pandemic (5 March 2020 to present). In its current iteration, the CDU expanded its remit to include identifying and responding to harmful misinformation relating to COVID-19, alongside its core function of disinformation monitoring, analysis and response”

It recently seems, however, to have taken on a life of its own in true Orwellian fashion.

Control of the spread of wild, harmful or (objectively) information contrary to Government policy is, I think, needed, as it ever was.

The question is how is this moderated. It appears to me that most of us are not happy with government interference in free speech and control of some media, including the BBC, although a lot of other broadcast channels do seem to be ‘controlled’. Recently several papers, notably The Telegraph, Independent and The Express have begun to discuss this. The planned expansion of the WHO ‘control’ of health information is another example where people are concerned.

The aim of this thread is to have an adult discussion. I would like to try to present to any of the watching world a grown-up discussion. To that end, any ‘internet hyperventilation’ will be suppressed. This means that excessive and repetitive use of capital letters (‘shouting’), exclamation marks, colour highlighting, other obvious hyper-ventilation and schoolboy misspellings will be edited out/deleted as appropriate. Anyone who wants to participate (and it is not mandatory!) should follow these guidelines.

So – serious discussion please – how do we ensure this does not become a monster in our new 'information age'. Do we boycott the MSM; boycott Facebook and any other ‘controlling’ media; stop paying the licence fee that funds the BBC; vote out the government, etc etc? Something needs to be done.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

I think what's surprising is that anyone is surprised (by government/media control).
I'm told my great-grandfather was yelling "Propaganda!" at the radio as soon as the BBC started broadcasting.
My mother relates that the adults in the family used to spend time during the week all sitting down arguing about what the media said, what they knew from other sources, what the truth probably was, and what they were going to do about it.
I don't think there has ever been a time, on either side of my extended family, when anyone did anything just because the government or the media told them to.
My own schooling, with several of the masters having been in combat in WW2, reinforced the idea of independent decision-making.

[Boac]

All well and good, Fox, but the problem appears to be that you may well be in breach of some 'law' in future if you do not do what the WHO dictate if the news we hear is accurate and the WHO get the changes they desire.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

1. We are all, including every judge, already in breach of some law or other these days, probably several.

There are too many laws (includes Regulations with the force of Law) for anyone to know them all, and the number that make no sense (and/or are positively dangerous or in complete opposition to other laws) is moderate and increasing rapidly.
Furthermore, the people tasked with enforcing Laws and Regulations don't know them all, and increasing either cannot detect breaches, or treat as breaches things which are not.
It's a mugs' game trying to keep up.
The only things that matter are: Will the authorities discover it? Will someone tell them if they can't discover it themselves? Will they do anything about it? and Is the penalty worth bothering about?

2. I live in an area where the law does not reach, by and large. Neither the government nor the Police ever come here, and "Nobody tells the government nuthin'!"

3. The government, either Provincial or Federal (we have no Local just here), has no ability to control what they already do claim to control, nevermind expanding out here.

4. If they do go after anybody, I will be way down their list. Far enough down that the peasants will have revolted long before they get to me.

If 2., 3, and 4. are not available to you as get-outs, you have my sympathies.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

I think there's a bigger problem than information control, and that's both media and government incompetence.
People are not giving up on consuming media because it is partisan or controlled. All that usually does is restrict the readership of each publication to people who agree with the views expressed (right or not).
No, people are giving up on all media because it's all wrong. The media is simply incompetent. They miss crucial facts, fail in logical analysis, and make incorrect predictions not because of control or partisanship, but because they are incapable of getting it right. They don't understand anywhere enough basic science, mathematics, and logic to analyse any complex situation.
And neither do governments, or any of their appointees, like central banks. Their predictions have been consistently wrong for ages. They do not know what is going on.
And so there's no point listening to what they say. It's simply a waste of time.

And they are all just as bad, which is why I think the percentage who vote is dropping like a stone around here. It's not just that you wouldn't have any of the candidates in the house, it's that you have no hope that any of them can fix the problems.

[tango15]

Sentiments with which I agree 100% F3.
Politicians, and to a large degree show business (and I include sport in that, for it is little different these days) just send messages - usually electronically, which are swallowed wholesale by the media. Independent reporting and dare I say it, investigative journalism, is all but dead. Publish something nasty about us, and there are no more press handouts for you, matey!

[llondel]

I gave up buying newspapers many years ago. Having been at the sharp end of a few things that did hit the news, and seeing their version of what happened and comparing it to mine, it was clear that we weren't even at the same event. Talking to friends who'd been in other newsworthy events, they agreed. So I stopped giving money to people who were tweaking the stories to be more sensationalist because it sold them more papers (but not to me). Once upon a time, being accurate in reporting was the important thing. Now it's being first, regardless of the accuracy of the initial reports.

[admin2]

T15 appears to be the only one who is concerned about the topic. According to Fox we should all just decamp and go 'off-grid' in a log cabin in the wilds of Canada and it will not matter and the other opinions are that the media is rubbish.

Not a single concern about 'government'/international control of information, apart from T15's glancing blow.

Is it all a myth?

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

'Concerned' has two elements; to be important to, and to have an influence on.
I think the government and media ought to be important, but neither you nor I can influence where it's going.
So I'm not going to stress myself about something I don't like at all but can't change.
And on that topic, there are many ways to meet the conditions I listed above, without going full 'Rambo'.
I live in a normal house. I am on-grid, and it powers my air conditioning and my hot tub. I have a 20 minute drive to see people like Bryan Adams in concert.
Any fool can be uncomfortable.
It's about finding a 'niche'. Reasonable neighbours are a good part of that.
Quite a few people here meet all or almost all those criteria already.

One particular point is consumption of media.
We can't change media by simply not buying it.
Viewership/readership figures are just about the biggest lie going these days.
Actual numbers of people are a tiny percentage of what they claim.
Even if nobody buys the media directly, the government will find a way to get taxpayers to fund it.
That's certainly the case in Canada.
But perhaps audience figures and funding are a different topic.

[llondel]

T15 appears to be the only one who is concerned about the topic. According to Fox we should all just decamp and go 'off-grid' in a log cabin in the wilds of Canada and it will not matter and the other opinions are that the media is rubbish.

Not a single concern about 'government'/international control of information, apart from T15's glancing blow.

Is it all a myth?

Take off your tinfoil hat and all will be fine once the assimilation process has completed I have a healthy dose of scepticism for any official pronouncement, but I don't automatically assume things are bad and reject everything they say. Far better to look at what is said and figure out who benefits from the (mis)information. Of course, it's not just limited to current governments dishing out dubious information, as is shown by various Florida residents.

[OneHungLow]

Another point of view on the so-called transcript


I am completely conflicted on this transcript.

Read the transcript again and noted timings etc. If it is a forgery/fake it is a very good one because it fits with James Cameron's take on events and is congruent timing wise.

I guess one will just have to withhold judgement on this one pending further "official" revelations.

Snopes seem to be of the same opinion!

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/titan-sub-transcript/

As of this writing, due to a lack of evidence as well as no reporting from credible sources, the authenticity of this supposed transcript or log of the Titan sub's final text messages was unconfirmed. This kind of a situation corresponded with our fact-check rating of "Unproven," a determination that does not mean we have concluded it is real or fake. Rather, this rating indicates that our findings have thus far been inconclusive.

Can the submersible communicate with the crew on the surface?

Yes. Titan communicates with the topside comms and tracking team via text messages which are exchanged via a USBL (ultra-short baseline) acoustic system. The sub is required to communicate with topside every fifteen minutes or more frequently if needed. Tracking of the sub's position (lat/long and depth) is achieved through the same system but is controlled by the computer and updates the sub's position every few seconds.

According to the reporting from Scientific American, the communications technology "allow[ed] for underwater acoustic positioning, as well as for short text messages to be sent back and forth to the surface vessel – but the amount of data that can be shared is limited and usually includes basic telemetry and status information."

.

[barkingmad]

O H L quotes:---"https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/titan-sub-transcript/"

I thought this "factchecking" site had been debunked, by yours truly, some time ago but memories are short?

https://anthonycolpo.com/fact-fudgers-w ... e-website/

This reference was updated over 2 years ago, but as some in O-N have been accused of failing to research properly I suppose it's our age or inbuilt biases which intervene?

[OneHungLow]

O H L quotes:---"https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/titan-sub-transcript/"

I thought this "factchecking" site had been debunked, by yours truly, some time ago but memories are short?

https://anthonycolpo.com/fact-fudgers-w ... e-website/

This reference was updated over 2 years ago, but as some in O-N have been accused of failing to research properly I suppose it's our age or inbuilt biases which intervene?

Bunkum and debunk em eh bm?

Who is this Calpol or whatever his name is, dude, and why should I care about what he says?

[Boac]

In the interest of balance, this was an assessment of 'The Daily Sceptic', a favourite source for BM on this site https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-sceptic-bias

It just goes to show that you cannot believe anything you see on the internet............ believe me.

[OneHungLow]

In the interest of balance, this was an assessment of 'The Daily Sceptic', a favourite source for BM on this site https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-sceptic-bias

It just goes to show that you cannot believe anything you see on the internet............ believe me.

Well when I am beset by internet FUD, (fear uncertainty and doubt) on the matter of submarines and submersibles and the like these days, I defer to two good friends, one an ex- SA Navy Commander at SIlvemine (now living the dolce vita in Italy but still locked into a network of specialists in these fields), and another a serving EXO in a service rather closer to the UK, and they generally set me to rights on these matters. Of course I look at bm's fonts of all knowledge too and still reserve my right to make my own judgement as to whom I might be apt to give more credibility!

[barkingmad]

In the interest of balance, this was an assessment of 'The Daily Sceptic', a favourite source for BM on this site https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-sceptic-bias

It just goes to show that you cannot believe anything you see on the internet............ believe me.

It's all made up as we know, by swivel-eyed loonies sitting in their underpants in their bedrooms converting sugary drinks to body mass, as any fule nose;

https://www.thenewstalkers.com/communit ... s-checkers

So "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

[Dushan]

So – serious discussion please – how do we ensure this does not become a monster in our new 'information age'. Do we boycott the MSM; boycott Facebook and any other ‘controlling’ media; stop paying the licence fee that funds the BBC; vote out the government, etc etc? Something needs to be done.

I think you forgot one option:

Sign-off O-N permanently.

[barkingmad]

From one who has been crapped on by The Establishment, Toby Young pens a brief piece on the topic which asks that old chestnut;

“Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?”

A hot topic indeed which needs more light and less noise;

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/who ... -checkers/