About
Community
Bad Ideas
Drugs
Ego
Erotica
Fringe
Society
Media
Televisionary / Film / Vidiots
The Media-Industrial Complex
Technology
register | bbs | search | rss | faq | about
meet up | add to del.icio.us | digg it

The Spectacular Achievements of Media Control

by Chuck Dodson

"Much enjoyed"--Noam Chomsky

anti-copyright 1994-97

When most Americans think about aggression in our society, our first thoughts are apt to include children being abused and/or killed by sick or outrightly criminal adults. We usually don't consider the somewhat broader context of what is going on behind the use of these issues, or the time periods in which they are most emphasized; in fact, in not seeing this we miss out on a crucial issue that comes down to what kind of society we want to live in.

Let me begin by comparing two different conceptions of one particular aspect of *being aware of aggression* which is fundamentally connected to free societies:

A) One conception has it that the full-fledged citizens of such societies, including those soon becoming full-fledged citizens, ought to be well-informed and be able to have a serious understanding of the complex issues facing them so that they can best participate in creating policies that promote justice and sanity, and make way for meaningful democracy. This is regarded as a normal and fundamental part of what a free society is about, and that any attempt to limit it is an extremely serious affair, something along the lines of the most dangerous fear of all: losing our democracy to become a fascist or totalitarian society.

B) An alternative conception has it that only a few people in democratic societies have the ability to "understand things as they are", and that most of the people of such societies, young and old alike, must be taught to internalize a story or myth about their society so that they remain involved only in a nonthreatening way.

This latter one may sound like an odd conception, especially next to that other one that is traditionally known for its seemingly careful vigilance, over centuries, to remain as aware as much as it could supposedly be, and has loudly protested whenever others have tried to set limits, but it's important to understand that this latter view is the prevailing conception not only in Western democracies but in most other modern societies as well.

In fact, this conception has been gaining more and more acceptance for hundreds of years; I'm going to begin in a relatively recent period and talk about how these notions not only affect the general public's perceptions, but also, critically, the lives and sanities of the younger people whom are to take our places in this democracy of ours when we finally allow them to. I'm also going to talk about how the problem of media and other disinformation enters within all this.

THE HORRID PLAGUE During the mid 1800's, the traditional power of the State-backed Church was more and more beginning to lose its hold on the people's minds. Most people agree that this had something to do with the "melting pot" effect that was happening around the time of the industrial revolution. People were emmigrating in large numbers from all over Europe and because of all of their suffering in the Old World, they wanted to make a better life for themselves in this New "Land of the Opportunity" as many--in certain public domains--were calling it.

Right around this time, several intelligent entrepreneurs began what would become multi-million dollar enterprises. One of these was a man by the name of Dr. John Harvey Kellogg, of Battle Creek, Michigan. Dr. Kellogg, along with his brother W.K., was bent upon promoting a product that he had produced during his work in the budding mental health field. Together they produced a product that was designed, like many others of the era, to help people. Today, the company that grew from the efforts of the good doctor and his younger brother has become a world-renowned influential corporation. But, back then, these men were unknown. They would have remained so hadn't they had a very interesting set of gimmicks--something that could place them apart from all the other salesmen whom would all too soon begin seeing dollar signs in their kind of product.(1)

Official history tells us that today's Kelloggs' corporation owes its success to these men's original product, Kelloggs' Corn Flakes. But conscious people would wonder how such a product could've ever survived decades of ever-heightening competition without some kind of powerful marketing tactics--some kind of gimmick.

Though "forgotten" today, one of the gimmicks used to promote this nostalgic American-made product was that it was promoted as an aid to help kids refrain from the hideous and unclean social problem of the day known as "self-abuse", or masturbation.

Dr. Kellogg and others (like Sylvester Graham and his cracker) became quite successful with their greatly helpful products. These intelligent businessmen were learning about what kinds of things got their market's attention. And, while Helping Society to stop the ever-creeping epidemic which was causing all sorts of suffering and unwanted deviance, they could make nice careers for themselves and their colleagues in a finally germinating mental health profession. (2)

Imagine if modern methods of communication had been available to these friendly professionals who wanted so much to help their fellow men face this unfortunate social problem. Imagine if they had been able to go on television and radio talk shows like "Oprah" or "The Jerry Springer Show", or do made-for-TV docu-dramas like those appearing on HBO and PBS; imagine the Experts getting on the air with all of their Scientific data and research. Imagine how they all could've gotten their *Helpfulness* out to the all who obviously needed it--all to benefit suffering people and end the appalling plague of self-abusers!

Certainly, enlightened audiences would listen and be so relieved that so many Trustworthy Experts were finally attending to this wrong --which was responsible for so much pain and heartache. The good citizens would breathlessly follow the Guidance and responsibly buy the recommended anecdotes --self-help books, medical remedies, and even specially-designed clothing. Finally, in the spirit of *aiding the Next Generation* towards a *Healthier Start* (than their adults had had as kids), the well-informed public would do as they were told. In the morning, they would feed their children Kelloggs Corn Flakes, in the afternoon, Graham Crackers, and at night, they'd dress them in certain snugly-fitting devices other (which were designed to house their child's genitals safe and sound). And, when these young'uns grew up they would be so thrilled about how their society cared so much, that they would certainly pass the great traditions on.

Yet, even without the benefit of modern forms of communication, the "self-abuse" gimmick was a great success --if our continued guilt about our secret pastime bears any witness.

It is interesting to look back at this today and study what happened. Those who participated in what became a heightened emotional outcry, in its leading and supporting roles, were members of a group of people. This group shared a mindset about society and how it was to be dealt with. And they took great pride in being "the more intelligent members of the community" as these "progressive" intellectuals called themselves, in having this ability to steer the incompetent masses onto a proper field of thought. By tapping into their readily available ignorance and fear the entrepreneurs were able to carry out their Charitable duties. (3)

The State-backed Church had always managed such resources with its conveniently flexible biblical interpretations, but now that it was losing control, it was important that someone else--with the proper authority-- regain the lost ground.

So, the leading minds realized that they had to adapt to these changes--changes they didn't want but couldn't help; changes that were weakening the grip of the traditional State-backed Church and allowing the masses to become too independent. They had to adapt to these changes and what better way than to form a new State-backed religion based on another kind of conveniently flexible interpretation. (4)

The clergy of this Church were always making "new findings" that had an interesting habit of becoming All-Encompassing Truth (and Policy) until, after much suffering, someone could "discover" the actual truth. Thus we had the terrible social problem of childhood masturbation. That worked. It worked very well. And it taught a lesson: Propaganda, when supported by the Trustworthy Leaders, and when no legitimate deviation is permitted from it, can have a big effect. It was a lesson learned by the Eugenics movement in the Hitler era and many others and it has been pursued to this day.

UNSIGHTLY CARNAGE

In the decades leading up to the Vietnam War there had been persistent responses that had learned from the earlier successes; responses against the incompetent rabble as they decided to think for themselves in the wrong ways. Ways like the independent organization of unions against exploitation. Or the gall to question their places as in the case of women and racial minorities. The official response came from several directions within the Rational sectors of society, but they all had one thing in mind: to tame the "bewildered herd" because "the common interests elude public opinion entirely," as the well-known progressive intellectual, Walter Lippmann and several others believed. (5)

One of these groups was the more modern kin to Dr. Kelloggs' contribution to the germinating Mental Health movement. With the aid of the usual machinations of public socialization these fresh new entrepreneurs birthed their designs quite easily. Then, when several havoc-wreaking independent movements becan coming together during the 60's and several errors on the parts of the Rightful Leaders were made, the new reincarnation was getting ready to make history in nearly the same vein as their dear old Dr. Kellogg.

Basically, the stupid masses were starting to catch on in part to what was going on. These errors were noted and studied and those making up "the more responsible members of the community" wanted to figure out how to stop having this little problem. They've got enough problems. So they took strategic steps to ensure that as few people as possible would:

1) Remember what happened

2) Catch on to such depths again

3) Be quite distracted from even imagining that they could or would want to approach such depths again.

This was all considered very serious that so many movements could come together. It was very dangerous to have the scapegoats --the racial minorities and radicals--and the victims of their Policies --students and young people-- coming together and building so quickly into a multi-faceted force to be reckoned with.

Even those on the forefront of Science had not wanted these multi-tiered movements --such as the sexual freedom movement (even it had sprouted from all the unsightly carnage)--to get as far as they did. It was considered a very serious dilemma to be coerced into changing earlier Conclusions (which had taken so much meritorious work); Conclusions such as the unfortunate mental illness of androphiles (gays and lesbians) or other deviations. They knew they'd have to change. The wicked masses wouldn't stand for them to so bluntly go from a democracy to an openly totalitarian State.

Finally, when they were pressured to change, conscious people should note how far they allowed themselves to be pushed.

There was just so much merciless pressure on the helpless leaders, what with the concerted outcry against the immorality of segregation and forcing the young men to fight an increasingly unpopular war. Or the women's and gay people's rights movement. As well as the general increasing tolerance of a radical subculture that accepted long hair, cross-race sexuality, the availability of contraceptives, domestic partnerships, and on and on. All this pressure coming at them from all sides, and they needed time. Time to weigh things out: like the probable consequences of this or that move; it was as if it was a chess match and some young whippersnapper had just begun attacking with bold audacity. The poor guys had to act with their Better Wisdom and, if you note, they moved their forces just barely enough to appease only the most powerful pressures.

Certain sections of the people within the mentioned liberty-seeking movements did get some changes made. And all their activism seemed to have paid off a little more. It seemed their stand against the lies and misinformation which had plagued them for so long was finally beginning to subside.

However, the Benevolent Leaders had interestingly continued their historical standards: While ripe fruits could be harvested by the newly more-accepted and influential movements, there was something entirely different waiting for their less-powerful constituents. And it resembled an interesting compromise from history where poor white indentured servants, who had united with the subhuman slaves (and sometimes even with the vermin indigenous peoples) in various rebellions against ill-treatment, were given tracts of land and other ammenities so that they would have reason to separate from any deeper-reaching, possibly seriously dangerous platform. (6)

In this way, the entire original justice-seeking ideal was weakened considerably. Similarly, the modern cousins to the poor white would-be revolutionaries were given a tract of land called "respectability." And the modern brethren of the status-quo found a solution they could literally swallow --that is, if the new members stuck with the program.

Those who were betrayed by this assimilation procedure were just weak enough so that only by restarting their own movement (which might take decades of renewed vigor and might not even flower--like so many movements of the oppressed) would they possibly gain access to hope. It's vital to realize that the "more capable" men had this in mind when they reacted in the defense of what they believed to be their best interests. Their chess move had saved their game even tho they had made a dangerous error. Luckily their opponents weren't as smart as they could've been.

It turned out that a lot of the "less capable" persons, having obtained their rewards, but not yet wielding perfect security, were quite willing to serve their alleged superiors. Remember, they'd only caught on to part of what was going on, namely their own mistreatment, and they hadn't thought that there might be any possible connection to a much deeper truth, much less felt that they could do anything about it. Perhaps they really didn't want to know --after all, they were enculturated to believe that the basic nature of the system really was well-intentioned--it was just sometimes that it had glitches and corruptions...

Anyway, they had begun to see the "light at the end of the tunnel" and certainly didn't want to go off down some weird other tunnel now. And HUSH, YOU TROUBLEMAKERS!! --they'd whispered indignantly when certain voices within their newly assimilating movements tried to alert people to what "the light at the end of the tunnel" might actually mean. Instilled within the prevailing leadership's minds, to the credit of the system, were the beliefs and doctrines that serve the powerful, the Established Mindset--the very forces that gave them their sweet fruits after all!

Such TROUBLEMAKERS, as these people who stray from the appropriate understandings for diverse reasons (kept non-understood), must be kept powerless; and not allowed to connect with other strayed fellows too deeply lest they create more trouble. Make sure they "know their place" via the use of whatever marginalizing label that can stick. And if that doesn't work, tame them in some way; so we need this new revolution in the art of democracy: the manufacture of consent. The media, the schools, parents, and popular culture have to instill the proper beliefs.

The marginalized may be allowed to spectate and once in awhile voice their naive or silly or kind of deranged opinions, but most of the time they've got to be atomized, segregated and alone. They're not supposed to organize because then they might be something beyond the minority aloof.

One or two silly tunnel-goers from our ranks can be tolerated to go off in another obviously stupid direction, and maybe a few others, in reaction, may limply question, but that's what happens when you have a democracy --certain people don't know how to act when they're given a little freedom. It's sad, y'know...

So, you make sure they're quite isolated. If they could be something beyond fashionable rebels or isolated weirdos, they might actually become participants if many of them with limited resources could get together to enter the political arena. That would be really threatening.

A major response was taken on the part of the Rightful Masters to ensure that this kind of thing wouldn't happen to the people I mentioned earlier who must be barred from equal standing with their fellow Americans; that is, anything truly authentic or deep-reaching that might last in order to build threatening bonds. Like bonds that might sustain the wrong consciousness or grow into alliances with the other troublemakers.

That major response has worked pretty well. Although the number of independent thinking ideals increased during the multi-faceted 1960's movements, by the 1980's, the range and influence of these ideals began to steadily drop.

It wasn't by accident. We're now talking about this new reincarnation from the days of Dr. Kellogg. They're spending lots and lots of money, attention, and thought into how to deal with the bad social problems of the day. They've got a whole public relations industry and many other tiers --like various professional guilds-- all which have interests in preserving their continued business. Such business can have a tough time if too many of their gimmicks get exposed, so they have to work like chess-players and out-maneuver the bad guys.

At the height of these freedom deviations, the Established mindset set to work to find a way to counter them. Obviously they tried to counter other movements too, but were most successful with those that were weakest.

SAVE THE CHILDREN!!!

The biggest scare in this era has revolved around that still seemingly limitless resource of people's ignorance and fear --sexuality. Especially when the sexuality of young people was involved. In the mid 70's the reincarnations of Dr. Kellogg latched onto a new series of manuevers that would further weaken a lot of what the late 60's and early 70's had wreaked way too much of--independent thought. This was quite successful; they came from the old "tried and true" method of fear of sex and laced it with a bit of revamped homophobia which would serve its purpose in two helpful ways: Divide the potential of the newly-progressing gay/lesbian movement (as well as, to a certain extent, the feminist and racial civil rights movements), and isolate the unwanted people so that they might return to their states of confusion and feelings of powerlessness.

The strategy was to approach the whole matter through the more subtle and effective means of propaganda, to turn the public against the inappropriate beliefs that some of these people held --like, the one that says kids aren't arbitrarily incompetent and irrational compared to adults. Or the one that claims that the young people could form fuly genuine--but nontraditional--bonds with adults they liked. The public had to be turned against these inappropriate beliefs, presenting them as harmful to the "Common Interests."

The Common Interests are those of "us" (who wish to finally go towards the light at the end of the tunnel)--the helpful professionals, the newly-progressing feminist, and the gay and lesbian consenting adults. That's all "us." We want to be together and have things like Harmony and Family Values and working together. Then there's those suspicious adults who like being around the children in the wrong way --those CHILD MOLESTERS out there who won't stop forcing themselves upon the "weak and immature." The first directive was around the "chicken hawks" who were making "chickens" pose in front of their cameras so that they could record their "abuse"; this breaks up all those hopes that we had for a continuing Harmony. So we've got to stop them so that we can all live together and protect our children.

The professionals and the concerned mothers all have the same interests. We can work together and work for Family Values and Harmony, liking and trusting each other, but we have to make sure that these "kiddie pornographers" don't come in and wreck what we've got going. That was the message essentially. A huge amount of effort was put into presenting it. This is, after all, the Business Community in general, so they control the media and have massive resources. And it has worked, very effectively. Some people who're now catching on in part call it the "child abuse hysteria," and are trying to say how it has gotten out of hand and that some of our hard-worked-for rights are beginning to be victimized as a result of it. Canada's new law banning all positive images and textual accounts or arguments of even legal sexual acts is a case in point. (7)

It's vital to realize that such hysterias have been promoted over and over again to keep people on the Proper Track. Such ruses have worked very effectively by mobilizing community opinion in favor of vapid, empty concepts like Family Values. Who can be against that? Or Harmony. Who can be against that? Or, as in the child sex abuse hysteria of the day: "Save the Children!" Who can be against that? In fact, what does it mean if somebody asks you, Do you want to save the people in Iowa? Can you say, Yes, I want to save them, or No, I don't want to save them? It's not even a question: it doesn't mean anything. The point of public relations slogans like "Save the Children!" is that they don't mean anything. They mean as much as whether you want to save the people in Iowa. Of course there was an issue. The issue was --Do you support our policy? But you don't want people to ponder that issue. That's the whole point of good propaganda. You want to create a slogan that nobody's going to be against, and everybody's going to be for. Nobody knows what it means, because it doesn't mean anything. It's crucial value is that it diverts your attention from a question that does mean something: Do you support our policy? That's the one you're not allowed to talk about.

So you have people arguing about Saving the Children? "Of course I don't not support them." --then they've won. It's like Family Values and Harmony. We're all together, empty slogans, let's join in, let's make sure we don't have these weirdos with their talk about intergenerational intimacy or kids' ability to figure out what they want and that sort of business. That's all very effective. It runs right up to today. And of course it is all carefully thought out. The people in the public relations industry aren't there for the fun of it. They're doing work. They're trying to instill the right values. In fact, they have a conception of what freedom ought to be: it ought to be a system in which "mature" people are trained to work in the service of the masters (the people who own the society)--and keep the naive and incompetent children and others in their proper place. The young people ought to be deprived of any form of genuinely constructive organizations where adults might build honest and lasting bonds with them, because such bonds just cause trouble. The "not yet fully human" people ought to be sitting in front of the TV and having drilled into their heads the message, which says, that in their time of to life --childhood-- they have to engage in play (not too serious) and watch adults doing incredible things, and be outside of the adult world pretty much while attending school and children's activities.

That's all there is in childhood. Kids may think in their own heads that there's got to be more that they can do than this stuff, but since they're watching the tube and learning to be good consumers of every latest fashion, they assume they must be a little strange to think they can be different from how other kids are imaged. And since there's no deeply powerful organization (that's absolutely crucial) that speaks about what they must keep secret--such as that old one called masturbation--they never have a real way of finding out whether they are weird and they just assume it, because it's natural. They might get together with a friend or two and do some "sex play" but not seeing anything really honest on TV or other imagery--just those scary cases of kids getting raped all the time --it's easy to think you’re wierd.(8)

DAMAGE CONTROL So that's the ideal, whether it's applied to the children or the preying chicken hawks, or those that think about the wrong ideas. Great efforts are made in trying to achieve that ideal. Obviously, there is a certain conception behind it. The conception of freedom and equality is the one that I mentioned. The troublemakers are a problem. We've got to prevent their deluded and naive and illiterate troublemaking. We've got to distract them. They should be watching the children's channels, playing video games, or watching the Superbowl.

And you've got to keep them pretty scared, because unless they're properly scared and frightened of all kinds of devils or diseases that are going to hurt them from outside or inside or somewhere, they may start to think. Therefore, it's imperative to distract and marginalize these troublemakers. In a totalitarian state you just hold a bludgeon over their heads, and if they get out out of line, you smash them over the head. In Palestinian Israel or Thailand you get the police and other professionals doing this, not just to adults, but kids too. Even though our society has had its own variations, like setting unpopular activists up for beating and rapes, or the new one about "paddling" graffiti artists in public, it isn't yet like these military states where the bludgeon is used as policy. (9) That's one conception of freedom and equality. In fact, going back to the business community, the last genuine victory for kids and other problem groups was during the 60's and 70's. After the free love and truly radical movements lost their momentum we moved to a business-run society at a remarkable level. Organizations and individuals now seeming to assert kids' rights are professionals with interesting stakes in their latest endeavors.

On the other front, the movement often called the "underground"--which lost much of its momentum due intrigueing circumstances--had uniquely genuine potentials where the oppressed people had control of their own voices amongst a radical milieu that was set up to challenge society on a broad scale. One of these independent voices was CHIPS (Cooperative Highschool Independent Press Sydicate) which got together with FPS, an independent publication put out by Ann Arbor Youth Liberation during the early 70's. Today, their literature is very hard to find, but if you do an Internet search, you'll find that a smattering of U.S. libraries do carry it and that some are open to all ages. Once you find these rare publications, you can take a read of what they were doing. What they're saying is a little different than say, one of these slickly produced "for kids" magazines you find everywhere in public libraries. But that's how it is today. The independent voices'reach into mainstream consciousness is virtually nil and structures for kids' viewpoints outside of corporate-controlled limitations --like those that fashionably deal with environmental issues or drugs and violence-- are virtually nonexistent. (10) It's a long way at least structurally from the ideal. Existing young people's media are controlled by a sub-adjunct to the mainstream, which are a corporate monopoly. And they all have the same point of view--tho a little more "snazzed" up to fit the "childhood" paradigm.

Take young people who become student representatives in their schools. Too often they are allowed only to participate in marginal ways like how to best carry out the programs of their adults. After the excitement of being elected to a student government wears off, it can get pretty meaningless if you're only allowed to take on superficial issues.

(article continues at www.fpc.net/pages/sigh/spec2.html) (approximately 5 parts in all; see notes at bottom of each part)

 
To the best of our knowledge, the text on this page may be freely reproduced and distributed.
If you have any questions about this, please check out our Copyright Policy.

 

totse.com certificate signatures
 
 
About | Advertise | Bad Ideas | Community | Contact Us | Copyright Policy | Drugs | Ego | Erotica
FAQ | Fringe | Link to totse.com | Search | Society | Submissions | Technology
Hot Topics
Simpsons movie!!
blazing saddles SUCKED
Gummo
Hannibal Rising
Who's Your Caddy?
Requiem for a dream
Mobster Movies
Top Ten Movies to Watch on Acid
 
Sponsored Links
 
Ads presented by the
AdBrite Ad Network

 

TSHIRT HELL T-SHIRTS