The Artificial Reality of the Matrix Media

About: american thinker: the artificial reality of the matrix media

The M$M pack mentality, global warming boondogglists, Congressional behavior, Wall Street  & the Housing Bubble can all be explained by some of this.
source: ... What the right is experiencing at the moment is a phenomenon called “cultural para-stimuli.”  You can read all about it in Tom Wolfe’s wonderful novel I Am Charlotte Simmons. It’s sort of like peer pressure on steroids. ...
What the right is experiencing at the moment is a phenomenon called “cultural para-stimuli.”  You can read all about it in Tom Wolfe’s wonderful novel I Am Charlotte Simmons. It’s sort of like peer pressure on steroids.  It was discovered by Nobel Laureate Victor Ransome Starling, who found that when he surrounded normal cats with cats whose behavior had been bizarrely altered by brain surgery, the normal cats began acting like the crazy cats all around them.
...
source: ... (ATOMIC DOG - A Conga Line of Copulating Kitties)

In fact, Starling’s altered cats had gone into such a state of extreme sexual arousal that one cat would mount another, followed by another, followed by yet another, until there was a line ten feet long; a virtual conga line of copulating kitties!

Cha-cha, cha-cha, cha-CHA!

Cha-cha, cha-cha, cha-CHA!

And this phenomenon wasn’t just a one-time event. Every time he let the cats out, cat-nookiepalooza!


... more of an explanation of the cultural para-stimuli phenomena. I guess to see it in it's real context in Washington DC you have to spend $150-$160 million dollars (in a recession) to see the Obama Coronation!
 
...& then there's Why So Many Minds Think Alike which bears on the phenomena.

Tags

  1. cultural para-stimuli
  2. media bias
  3. c3l
  4. not impressed
  5. fair witness

Comments


Seth says
Well i didn't find much truth in your American Thinker article.  What i found instead was the illogical thinking of cherry picking examples and right wing biases.  For example he assumes that the media "shamelessly carried water for Barack Obama during the election" yet he somehow can ignor when they put the Rev Right on an endless loop.  Imho, this article is just partisan bloviation.  What i find true is that the media has enormous power to sway public opinion based upon what stories they pick to broadcast.  But there are no true picks, just reporters and editors picking stories. 

You seem to raise the point that reporters pick stories based upon "peer pressure".  For example when a talking head asks the question "Why didn't Obama release his Blago report sooner", then others must keep repeating that same dumb question again and again.  Perhaps there is a pack instinct in the press.  But it goes both ways ... it evens out ... in the overall it is not partisan, unless you only watch partisan channels.  Rather than calling this an example of relative truth, i would prefer calling it an example of the subjectivity of selective attention ... in short:  you see and hear what you want ... kind of like the big dipper effect

Mark de LA says
It's more like Stockholm syndrome! with Americans as prisoners of the media. The Big Dipper distinction is more zen than you get.  It points the making of distinctions.  If you start with beginner's mind you have a way out of the habituation & lack of learning that jumping to a familiar distinction imprison your mind with.


Mark de LA says

I kinda liked the mental imagry of a conga line of copulating kitties myself!

Seth says
choy 2009-01-16 11:15:07 11279
It's more like Stockholm syndrome! with Americans as prisoners of the media. The Big Dipper distinction is more zen than you get.  It points the making of distinctions.  If you start with beginner's mind you have a way out of the habituation & lack of learning that jumping to a familiar distinction imprison your mind with.

But we are not exactly prisoners of the media.  We can pick and choose what we watch.  We can choose to watch O'Riley or change the channel and watch Oberman ... Hannity or Meadows ... it's your choice.  Me i watch both except Hannity usually is so hyperpartisan that i can't take much of him.  Oberman is funny because he so passionately dramatizes his hyperpartisan bloviations ... and since that is my particula bent, it's fun to watch.  So what we are is prisoners who have their choice of captors ...
... not really prisoners at all.  And then there is the Internet if you want to reach out of the box ... if you want to actually persue a non-brodcast media matrix view.  All in all we are in a better perdicament than we were prior to the 80s when there were a limited number of TV channels broadcasting the news.  Thinking about M$M that way puts this article in better context.  Ask yourself the question:  Do we have more sources of news today or 20 years ago?

Mark de LA says
With the democrats behind something called the "fairness doctrine" we'll see how much balance there is in the media later on in the show. The great unwashed use the cheapest media like radio & network TV which (unlike cable & the internet) is predominately leftist. It's not all the formal media anyway.  You have liberal schools (teacher unions) forced to watch Algore's movie.  You have liberal Universities with globalism & sexual identity forums, etc. You have to go to cable to get FoxNews & real fair & balanced. Free Bread & Circuses to everyone!


Mark de LA says
Yep, Foxnews by far exceeds all the rest of the media in presenting both sides of all the issues combined. 


Mark de LA says
seth 2009-01-16 15:08:12 11279
M 2009-01-16 14:57:23 11279
Hmmmm.... I just thought your question was stupid to begin with!
Well how was i to interpert your remark ..
source: M above
You have to go to cable to get FoxNews & real fair & balanced.
... ?  If my question was stupid, was not that remark "stupid to begin with" ?   Thing is you have made similar remarks in the past.  I was actually trying to grok whether you were aware of the color of the filter with which you view politics, or whether you claimed some kind of immunity from that, or whether you are think it is entertaing to be funny stupid.
This item was primarily about the topic "cultural para-stimuli" & the matrix of alternative realities the M$M provides the people.  It is not a RWG repository for the SOS. These phenomena are fascinating especially the conga line of copulating kitties (cultural para-stimuli).  Media bias is an old & tired topic to be handled somewhere else. If you want to pursue your funny stupid line of commentary then the best I can do is shit a couplet or two  for 4413 like:
funny stupid
you're no cupid
not even witty
same old shitty!


Mark de LA says
source: ... The above is a set of truly disparate examples with a very definite pattern -- one of deception.  The hard, cold, sad truth is that the mainstream media distort virtually every important issue of the day. 
...The title article develops the idea that the media goes far beyond bias into the fabrication of their own reality (like the movie Matrix).
The 2nd linked article is about the psychology of people who mimic deviant aberration based on a psychological experiment with anecdotal evidence.  In a way it is contact stupidity. When you surround yourself with idiots don't morn the loss of your IQ.
source:

The ancient Japanese must have at least had an inkling of this as evidenced by this proverb:


...The final article (CNN)min this nexus or vortex of reality checking speaks to the science of group think or people who are afraid to think for themselves & would rather go along with the crowd.
The nexus here tends to support the idea that people don't think for themselves - media included.  The title article declares the death of the old style media that used to be the eyes & ears of the people & a check on the 3 branches of government.  Yet another way of saying that is that if you are looking for the truth or even reality go somewhere else. They suggest the Internet - I don't!




Seth says
source: M above
Someday when we have an intelligent application that can scan the media & digest it for exactly what is being said, then perhaps we can send out some "fair witnesses" to verify the contents  & you & I could then trust but verify anyway.
 The UnhackTheBrain project was intended to go there but is currently overwhelmed by the task!
The notion that human understanding can be enhanced by artificial intelligence remains unrealized.  Since AI is measured and guided by natural intelligence, personally i see no way for it to pull itself up above its creators.  Language must be interpreted to yield meaning and understanding in a human's mind.  Sorry, i don't believe we will ever be able to delegate the function of interpretation (digesting it for exactly what is being said) to a machine process.  However AI can be utilized in the communication process ... finding what you are looking for in Wikipedia is more intelligent than trying to find it in the Encyclopedia Britannica. 

I started loosing interest in your UnhackTheBrain when you started making it a forum for projecting your right wing biases.

Seth says
M 2009-01-16 14:22:42 11279
seth 2009-01-16 12:34:21 11279
M 2009-01-16 12:24:42 11279
Yep, Foxnews by far exceeds all the rest of the media in presenting both sides of all the issues combined. 

Do you think that just possibly that opinion might be tinted by your own right wing bias?
Nope! Do you think your opinion is tainted by your left wing bias?
Well certainly my opinions are tainted by my biases.  FoxNews is certainly right wing and MSNBC is certainly left wing.  CNN is pretty close to the middle of the road.  We could even make an experiment and count the number of events that are covered live by each network and whether they favor the left or the right wing.  The way to do it is to notice that an event that favors one side or the other is being carried live on one of the networks ... then go to the other networks and see if they are also carrying it live.  For the experiment we would only use live events as that syncronizes the time and we can arrive at a definitive determination of coverage or not.  I got the baseline this afternoon when all three networks covered the NCSB news conference re the Hudson River miricle.  As this was not a partisan event, all of the networks coverage was substantually identical.  With the inaguration comming up it will be interesting to watch if the live coverage diverges.  Tracking the talkin head commentary is a whole lot more difficult.

And, btw, your saying "nope" and not acknowledging how your own biases affect your opinions of what constitutes truth is just funny stupid.

Seth says
You say "Media bias is an old & tired topic to be handled somewhere else", but media bias is the topic of "The Artificial Reality of the Matrix Media" which is what your item is about.  If you wanted your item to be primarily about "cultural para-stimuli & the matrix of alternative realities the M$M provides the people", then you should have chosen a different title and a different about box. No, my comments on media bias are not off topic here, no matter how distasteful they appear to you.  But by all means please develop the  Cha Cha Cha kitties angel ... i have no idea what it means to you beyond just what is stated in that article ... nor what connection it has with the Media Matrix. 

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-01-17 09:40:38 11279
Well your choice of an American Thinker hack job on the media to say "media goes far beyond bias" is certainly ironic if not unfortunate.  But i will easily grand that the story we get from the media is not reality.  And i agree that reporters and talking heads exhibit "monkey-see monkey-do"  behavior. 
source: M above
Yet another way of saying that is that if you are looking for the truth or even reality go somewhere else. They suggest the Internet - I don't!
Where would you go for better reports and interpretations of the events of the day?
Wake up & look around you - it is the best thing we can do these days.  The rest is an illusion. In a way the conversations of the day are our only reality.  Our lives are merely the living conversations, internal & external which we have. These are the semantics of our lives. The farther we go from what we can touch personally the more we are dealing with maya. As I have said before, blogs only act as a megaphone. Someday when we have an intelligent application that can scan the media & digest it for exactly what is being said, then perhaps we can send out some "fair witnesses" to verify the contents  & you & I could then trust but verify anyway.
 The UnhackTheBrain project was intended to go there but is currently overwhelmed by the task!

Mark de LA says
Seth, you start making some kind of sense & then you always seem to run off the road into your own RWG sphinctermindedness.  Most of your latest posts are just name calling.  I thought you had grown out of it.

Some kind of AI natural language processing is already alive & living in a lot of institutions. Extracting exactly what is being said, who are the entities, what is the who, what, when, where, why & how of the news can be done.  Bullshit lives in the uncertainty of just what is being said because people will read their own prejudices into the uncertainty.  The UnhackTheBrain vision also includes exposing the bad quality of reporting by showing what is missing & the various features of the M$M like anonymous sourcing. 
 

Mark de LA says
Bias & the n-word of hyperpartisanship lives in the eye of the beholder: Luke VI,41-42

Mark de LA says
You may or not be glad to know that Dr. Victor Starling of the copulating cat conga line (C3L)is an invention of Tom Wolfe of the Electric Kool Aid Acid Test, The Right Stuff fame (& others). The book which contains such is called I am Charlotte Simmons.

Seth says
source: M above
Extracting exactly what is being said, who are the entities, what is the who, what, when, where, why & how of the news can be done.  Bullshit lives in the uncertainty of just what is being said because people will read their own prejudices into the uncertainty.
Huh? 

What "exactly is being said" there?   What does "Bullshit lives in the uncertainty of just what is being said because people will read their own prejudices into the uncertainty" mean to you?  People must read their own prejudice into whatever they interpret ... that is what "interpret" means ... and that is the way human language works.   There is no meaning without that.  There is no absolute meaning of words.  The are our creation and they have no meaning apart from our interpretation.  Your sentences above are a beautifully ironic demonstration of just that. 

From another point of view your words above mean only what they meant to you when you wrote them.  But then nobody else can know what that was, not even you yourself now.


Mark de LA says
     Being a certified master clinical hypnotherapist, as I am, I know that the more vague I speak giving some suggestion of an idea the more the subject I am hypnotizing will fill it in with his own material which will be from his own prejudices & cache of big dipper effect past experiences. 
     As far as media goes, using vaguely sourced material somehow implies authority to what is being said in a reporting far beyond what would be said if the sources were not anonymous.
I know that in a large crisis (global warming, housing bubble burst, recession, wars etc..) that people will grasp at all kinds of hope & change to get out of being impacted.  The larger the so-called crisis the easier the con.  People will grasp at straws. The bullshit put out by politicians is a bunch of vague solutions - the details of which will always come later. When the time arrives for action the story changes.  Always more money, more time, different goals, things were more or less severe etc. show up.  That is the bullshit!
 If you are somewhat aware or fully aware of what you have in the way of your own bullshit in your own interpretation of things then you can span the gap - otherwise NOT! I covered some of that in 3976.
Seth: ... From another point of view your words above mean only what they meant to you when you wrote them.  But then nobody else can know what that was, not even you yourself now.
... so according to you the chance to communicate is essentially impossible! Your last sentence (in the quote) needs a bull-shit filter.



Mark de LA says
seth 2009-01-18 18:31:54 11279
source: M going beyond what i actually said above
... so according to you the chance to communicate is essentially impossible!
Not impossible, but not as prevalent as most people think when they say something.  Mostly what you have is habitual behavior that would go on regardless of the substance of the information communicated.  That would account for most of social and political discourse - less so in commerce and science.  Real communication takes mutual intent - not very much of that on fastblogit.
There is always communication, bro - just might not be exactly what you thought or wanted to communicate!


Mark de LA says
... or as Tony Robbins used to say "The meaning of your communications is the response you get." 


Mark de LA says
seth 2009-01-16 12:12:20 11279
M 2009-01-16 11:54:04 11279
With the democrats behind something called the "fairness doctrine" we'll see how much balance there is in the media later on in the show. The great unwashed use the cheapest media like radio & network TV which (unlike cable & the internet) is predominately leftist. It's not all the formal media anyway.  You have liberal schools (teacher unions) forced to watch Algore's movie.  You have liberal Universities with globalism & sexual identity forums, etc. You have to go to cable to get FoxNews & real fair & balanced. Free Bread & Circuses to everyone!

Well i doubt that the "fairness doctrine" will gain much traction ... rather i think you will find that there will just be less partisanship in the next 4 years.  Don't argue about it, just wait and see.  My own scan of the radio bands has yielded far more right wing talk shows than progressive ones, so if the great unwashed can only hear the radio i suspect that they get quite enough cheep exposure to those partisan biases. 

And now can i ask you to answer a simple question totally honestly and without a change of topic:  Do you really find FoxNews to be fair and balanced ?

& the beat goes on.....
source: ... Asked by Press if she could be counted on to push for hearings in the Senate this year "to bring these (radio station) owners in and hold them accountable," she replied: "I have already had some discussions with colleagues and, you know, I feel like that's gonna happen. Yep." 
 
... silencing the opposition is the only way for democrats to ram through their agenda apparently!

Mark de LA says
There are many sources including Rush who has a big vested interest. Knowing the players & their published points of view gives many clues. Like many of BHO's plans they only get detail once they are ready to be passed in an emergency. We'll see what shows up.


Seth says
MR 2009-03-05 15:09:29 11279
seth 2009-03-05 14:43:09 11279
MR 2009-03-05 13:11:34 11279
Yep, the only way liberal bankrupt ideas can survive is to silence the opposition. It works in Russia, Venezuela, North Korea & other places.
See attempts to restore the so-called fairness doctrine in new-speak of diversity.

Even though "President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine" you and WND are still afraid of it. 
If you actually analyze what is being proposed, while not called the fairness doctrine, it is aimed at reducing conservative talk radio by putting restrictions upon programming mix & who can own radio stations. It will be bad for radio business & bad for real diversity.  Talk radio for liberals didn't succeed not because of any lack of opportunity but because nobody wants to sponsor a program that nobody wants to listen to - angry anti-business liberals. The real balance is conservative talk radio against all the M$M on TV & everywhere else. A turd by any other names stinks just the same.

Can you provide some text of this alleged proposal and some exact quotes of the people who doing the proposing?  I cannot find any references to "what is being proposed" outside of WND. My experience has been that if WMD is the only source, then the story is probably their concoction.

Mark de LA says
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/record-19-reporters-media-execs-join-team-obama/380971

For some Washington reporters and media execs, cheering their team from the sidelines just isn’t good enough: Tugging on a red, white and blue Team Obama jersey is the answer.

That’s the case for a whopping 19 journalists and media executives, including five from the Washington Post and three each from ABC and CNN, who’ve gone into the administration or center-left groups supporting the president.

Those inside the administration hit 14 this month when the Post’s Stephen Barr joined the Labor Department. That’s a record, say some revolving door watchers, and could even be much higher: The Post reports that “dozens” of former journalists have joined the administration, although Washington Secrets couldn’t verify that tally
... For me it's a one-way door.  Don't expect me to believe former journalists who become propagandists. Apparently, the good money is in propaganda ... or propaganda pays better than journalism. That's why we call it the M$M.




Seth says
M 2012-08-15 12:26:02 11279
Here are the articles (via Drudge)

PRESS: Obama the Wizard...

AP does it again...







Mark de LA says
Here are the articles (via Drudge)

PRESS: Obama the Wizard...

AP does it again...



See Also

  1. Thought Not not impressed with 49 viewings related by tag "not impressed".
  2. Thought Googling around about Mckayla with 5 viewings related by tag "not impressed".
  3. Thought Fair Witnesses with 2 viewings related by tag "fair witness".
  4. Thought The Art of Listening with 2 viewings related by tag "fair witness".
  5. Thought A good working definition of fariwitness with 1 viewings related by tag "fair witness".
  6. Thought Hands Up Don't Shoot with 1 viewings related by tag "FairWitness".
  7. Thought about: Sterling Business Career with 1 viewings related by tag "not impressed".
  8. Thought Media Bias ? UCLA Study with 0 viewings related by tag "media bias".
  9. Thought The meme is on fire but unimpressive with 0 viewings related by tag "not impressed".
  10. Thought about: Hands Up Don't Shoot - comment 59755 with 0 viewings related by tag "FairWitness".
  11. Thought Embrace Media Bias with 0 viewings related by tag "media bias".
  12. Thought about: SpinSpotter: What We Do with 0 viewings related by tag "media bias".