/lit/ - Literature

>>19895136
>beware the mass media
>vote democrat though
read ted instead

>>19895136
It basically describes this website which manufactures fascist adjacent consent through subliminal means, ritualized memes and thereby group think, for example.

>>19895136
An inferior version of picrel

>>19895321
If a website that allows anonymous dissent from anybody is "manufacturing consent", then so is anywhere with any type of group discussion at all. This is the most contrarian website in the internet and the worst example of the OP.

Gnome Chumpsky is a midwit. He can't even fathom what dialectics are.

>>19895446
No, because there are discernible patterns, and here it's fascist mystification. People don't come out of here having absorbed leftist meme viruses, nor even Burkean conservatism, but rather fascistic reaction. It's a pattern, quite likely a psyop.

Parenti Inventing reality better

>>19895446
4chan is manufactured dissent lol

>>19895136
theres a 40 minute doc on youtube that will give you the tl/dr; My opinion is it's good.

>>19895499
Exactly. The dominant flavor here, by far, is Bronze Age Pervert avant la lettre. The latter's book's basis is precisely the meme ground cleared and set by 4chsn. But these are almost certainly heavily manufactured phenomenon. I mean if TPTB "admit" and insist Russia does it, they're by basic logical implication admitting to the same, whether they wish to do so or not. One would have to be an idiot to believe otherwise, just on the basis of what insist about Russia alone. It's not a conspiracy, foreign states really do engage in meme warfare on sites like 4chan and Reddit. So, by their own leave, we can readily believe that is goes beyond mere conspiracy nonsense, and yet we're to believe that the US and UK don't do it, on the other hand?

>>19895499
Exactly. The dominant flavor here, by far, is Bronze Age Pervert avant la lettre. The latter's book's basis is precisely the meme ground cleared and set by 4chan. But these are almost certainly heavily manufactured phenomenon. I mean if TPTB "admit" and insist Russia does it, they're by basic logical implication admitting to the same, whether they wish to do so or not. One would have to be an idiot to believe otherwise, just on the basis of what they insist about Russia alone. It's not a conspiracy, foreign states really do engage in meme warfare on sites like 4chan and Reddit. So, by their own leave, we can readily believe that this goes beyond mere conspiracy nonsense, and yet we're to believe that the US and UK don't do it, on the other hand?

>>19895542
>4chan is a mass media conglomerate that act as a pr firm for corporations and the government

Your a fucking idiot.

The idea of all the systems of media power coordinating so that they don't even have to explicitly control messaging (i.e. tell journalists what to say) because they've created a machine that endlessly self perpetuates the message they want to get across was pretty compellingly argued in the book and it resonated with me a great deal when I read it.

>>19895446
"manufacturing consent" refers specifically to the state of mass media at the time of that book's writing, but in our heavily commoditized society similar processes are at play way beyond just that. read the society of the spectacle.

>>19895564
You really think everything on here is anonymous people shitposting? This site has been infested with outside influences since the mid 2000s.

>>19895575
how can a journalist transcend the limits dictated by said machine ?

>>19895136
Voting blue no matter who in the future

>>19895588
Publishing independently. If you work for a major media company, there is no chance for you

>>19895564
You're saying the US government did not claim that Russia was inundating the English language internet with meme warfare activity?

>>19895575
It's just common sense at this point. Chomsky got it right.

>>19895588
The same way you solve every problem: kill your bosses.

So where is consent not manufactured? Let me guess academia

>>19895602
>>19895595
this "machine" goes beyond major media outlets and their individual bosses. nothing assures that after leaving CNN or having hanged its boss you'll be able to avoid aiding the self-perpetuation of this beyond-human status quo. a journalist would still have to navigate within it and even if they were stubbornly "revolutionary" enough to actively oppose it, they'd only be able to conceive of such opposition (and of an alternative) through the tools provided by it..

>>19895613
Subtle

>>19895613
Consent is manufactured everywhere, but not everywhere has it been made into a science, makes it exceedingly more effective and totalitarian in an "invisible" but no less dystopian sense, because of the passivity or complicity it obtains from the sheep for precisely the sorts of neo-colonialist wars that have destroyed large parts of the Middle East and which have caused Europe to become inundated with millions of refugees. These in turn destabilize Europe (the EU) and set the ball rolling for ethno-nationalism, fascism, political and even military conflict between states in the Continent once again. Who benefits from this, if not the US all over again?

>>19895598
It obviously did, but Manufacturing consent itself is not about cyberwarfare or "meme warfare" or even honey potting. It's about the the mainstream media, OP asked what the book was about, not some take on how the book could be applied in modern times. (and it still applies to modern times as is, since mainstream media like CNN and FOX news still exist.)

>>19895460
I always assumed that Stormfront and other neo nazi sites more or less took this site once they realized that 1. it has a lot of users and 2. that they could say whatever they wanted. 3. during the gamergate shit it was ripe for manipulation. Thus it was a perfect target for fascist propaganda.

>>19895766
Exactly

>>19895321
>fascist

Yikes.

>>19895806
Yes, this is basically where oligarchy with bourgeois complicity uses the "groundlings" to defend and perpetuate itself by radical seeming memes.

>>19895661

You consent to the system when you play into it. There is literally nothing stopping you from opting out and becoming a criminal.

>But muh police, muh jail time!
sorry that's the price you pay for not wanting to be part of the herd. Deal with it.

So is this just the marxist version of "DA JOOOOS" and if it is why should I bother reading it?

>>19895872
You think the addictive superficiality of this isn't site isn't being exploited for purposes of subliminal consent manufacturing?

>>19895890
Of course it is, but not in the direction you described. Your fear of Europeans collectivizing to save their culture and history tells me you have fallen for the same traps Chomsky has.

>>19895450
>Dialectics
The ultimate refuge of the pseude

>>19895923
Europeans already collectivized, it's called the EU, and the US wants to neuter or outright destroy it.

>>19895579
that book sucked. was expecting some sort of deep analysis but it basically boiled down to 'blame the jews'

>>19896547
EU is not for Europeans but for globalists. By Europeans I mean people of European descent living in Europe of course, not every resident of the EU. You are afraid of people of European descent collectivizing. What is your ethnicity?

>>19896745
Losing proposition. This is precisely the racialist mentality that got Europe into trouble in the form of the Nazis. It's true Europe has let itself become a second rate power, precisely because it lost control of its natural sphere of influence, which coincides with the ancient Roman empire. The European near abroad includes all of North Africa, Asia Minor (including Arabian peninsula), Hindustan west and north of the Himalayas, and all of Western Europe. The peoples contained within this zone can all be Europeanized if the will is there, or else they will and have become Americanized, which lessens the power of Europe and makes her precisely what you complain of, that she's not master of her own house. A defensive game will get you nowhere, the Russians clearly understand this.

>>19896745
Losing proposition. This is precisely the racialist mentality that got Europe into trouble in the form of the Nazis. It's true Europe has let itself become a second rate power, precisely because it lost control of its natural sphere of influence, which coincides with the ancient Roman empire. The European near abroad includes all of North Africa, Asia Minor (including Arabian peninsula), Hindustan west and north of the Himalayas, and all of Western Russian. The peoples contained within this zone can all be Europeanized if the will is there, or else they will and have become Americanized, which lessens the power of Europe and makes her precisely what you complain of, that she's not master of her own house. A defensive game will get you nowhere, the Russians clearly understand this.

>>19896673

wut? how is that what you took away?

>>19895136
the section about how media coverage of the khmer rouge flip-flopped repeatedly over the course of several years was pretty interesting

>>19895145
Ted who?

>>19895136
Manufacturing Dissent

>>19895575
Gen-Xer?

Analysis of how the mass media manipulates the public and pushes certain state propaganda narratives

pair this with bernays propaganda, ellul propaganda, debord society of the spectacle, and adorno on the culture industry

>>19898750
Got anything like this that isnt communist?

>>19898769
no

>>19895889
Chomsky is not a Marxist. Yes you should read it, or at least the first few chapters to understand how this idea works.
>>19895473
Haven't read this one yet but I like Parenti. It's always funny when he disrespects Chomsky here and there. Their divide is weirdly symbolic to the split between anarchists and tankies. Not a big fan of Chomsky but I respect his work. Sadly they're both old af and will probably die in the near future, and I don't see anyone else replacing them.

>>19895321
Based anon manufacturing consent through accusations of consent manufacturing.

>>19898769
Public opinion by Walter Lippmann though I have not read it yet

>>19895575
>systems of media power coordinating so that they don't even have to explicitly control messaging

This is the thesis of a book published by Random House. So he's either wrong or his book is furthering the interest of the machine, man. I wouldn't even bring it up but Chomsky lives to latch onto petty formal inconsistency as if it obliterates the object of his ire, so fuck him. Guys an embarassing fossil from, while not being an activist himself, an era in cringey gen-x activism, who are all now still wearing Docs manufactured by a venture capitalist firm and forcing their children to dress as the opposite sex because it became popular in the 'devil media' the last few years, which Chomsky is more than happy to shore up these days.

>>19895923
>you have fallen for the same traps Chomsky has.
Chomsky is literally Jewish you retard.

>>19895136
I didn't get very far into this book because of Noam's verbose try-hard prose. Never witnessed anyone sniffing their own farts this much. It just oozed with pretentiousness. Sucks because I was fairly excited to read it.

>>19898769
Bernays isnt a commie. He thought that people were morons that were too stupid to govern themselves.

>>19898707
ted deez nuts

>>19898786
>It's always funny when he disrespects Chomsky here and there.
Examples?

Tl;dr is that the media only runs stories that accord with the perspectives big corporations, the government, and wealthy donors because it's expensive as hell to run a newspaper/site, and so good relations with these guys both offsets the cost factor and provides sources which are extremely important in journalism. If you main a good relation with the U.S. military or some corporation, they'll treat your reporters very well and provide insider status + early access to info that everyone else gets secondhand. Keep in mind everyone wants to break the story first and you get how important it is to have good sources. Now consider that most information is actually acquired secondhand, and you realize this insider status is highly valuable and you can always dangle this sword over journos when they begin to step over the line and report "inconvenient truths".

That's the first part of the book. The rest is just proving this thesis through example from major news stories of the '80s.

>>19899781
I remember it once in his lecture about yugoslavia

>>19895613
>No, I'm not gonna read it to find out what it says. I'm just going to save time and make something up that I disagree with instead.

>>19900807
It's called efficiency, anon.

>>19895136
Corporations such as Goldman Sachs do not want negative press run about them. Therefore they take punitive action on periodicals and other Mass Media that report on their various misdeeds, denying them advertising money if they publish stories about the misdeeds. In effect this puts a hurdle in the way of negative reporting on corporations, meaning there is less of such. So too does these media have incentive to downplay misdeeds of America's allied countries with those oppositionally aligned. For example, mentions in the NYT and other major publications of the word "genocide" with mass killings in other countries has clear correlation with whether we are allied with the country in question or if it is our client state.

>>19898750
>>19898804
Endorsed, good mix there - Christian anarchism, unenlightened capitalism, critical theory, situationism

>>19895321
retard

>>19901849
*do these media. Also the Adam Curtis doc Century of the Self about Bernays is entertaining if not informative

>>19898707

Theodore Kazcynski, the man who wrote "Industrial Society and it's future"

>>19901849
thanks
nice chart

>>19901941
thanks

>>19895136
>what am I in for?
https://youtu.be/35DSdw7dHjs

>>19895588
I think independent media, obviously.

I'd add that Chomsky's point is not that everything the media says is false. One example is reporting during the Vietnam War. There were journalists who were trying to do honest work, and they reported on war atrocities by the U.S. military, but the propaganda through-line in the stories -- which they had to include to get them published -- would be a narrative framing that "this goes against our values" and so forth. Understanding the difference between the facts and the propaganda line is how to critically analyze the news media. The opposite of doing this is to do what, say, Alex Jones does, which is to reject facts in the news media as the propaganda line -- but he's selling a different kind of propaganda line.

Another point Chomsky makes, though, is that journalists are constrained by the system they work in, which selects people who will reproduce status-quo ideology and this starts from kindergarten (or more precisely, filters out the people who will be disobedient or rebellious). And this is unconscious. He said this to a journalist who interviewed him once, "I'm sure you believe everything you're saying, but if you didn't believe it, you wouldn't be sitting where you're sitting."

The Russiagate story in the media is a great contemporary example, because the story was baloney, but the journalists who published those stories -- fed to them by intelligence "sources" and so forth -- were promoted. So, you don't get punished for being wrong, necessarily, you get promoted for being wrong as part of a pack... and at the right time. Being right at the wrong time, on the other hand, means you might not have a career in journalism. And now those Russiagate stenographers in the media are selling stories about "Havana Syndrome."

https://youtu.be/lLcpcytUnWU

>>19902170
> Chomsky's point is not that everything the media says is false
Appreciate the effort post. For the above: close but not quite. The atomic unit of propaganda isn't lies, it's emphasis. Publications do not rely on out-and-out falsehoods but rather omission, connotation, spotlight. Looking to a rather middlebrow example from this week we have an example of connotation. Headlines say Neil Young "requests removal" if Joe Rogan remains on the platform. "Requests removal", "complaint", "protest" etc - you will NEVER see the word 'ultimatum' used outside of the business press (which necessitates clarity rather than spin).

In omission there are too many examples to count, the ones popping into my head prima facae include Catholic priest abuse allegations, Weinstein, Joe Biden's accuser. Whenever someone says something was an "open secret" but you didn't know about it, that's the entire media apparatus not doing their job.

Spotlight yields examples like the recent "Joe Biden giving crack pipes to the Blacks" stuff you've been seeing over the past 3 days. Preventative measures to lessen harm to addicts, has been going on for years, just happens to coincide with public health legislation that's being considered next week.

>>19895136
>chomsky
Yikes

>>19895145
>I cant read

>>19899781
>Many on the U.S. Left have exhibited a Soviet bashing and Red baiting that matches anything on the Right in its enmity and crudity. Listen to Noam Chomsky holding forth about “left intellectuals” who try to “rise to power on the backs of mass popular movements” and “then beat the people into submission. ... You start off as basically a Leninist who is going to be part of the Red bureaucracy. You see later that power doesn’t lie that way, and you very quickly become an ideologist of the right. . . . We’re seeing it right now in the [former] Soviet Union. The same guys who were communist thugs two years back, are now running banks and [are] enthusiastic free marketeers and praising Americans” {Z Magazine, 10/95).
>Chomsky’s imagery is heavily indebted to the same U.S. corporate political culture he so frequently criticizes on other issues. In his mind, the revolution was betrayed by a coterie of “communist thugs” who merely hunger for power rather than wanting the power to end hunger. In fact, the communists did not “very quickly” switch to the Right but struggled in the face of a momentous onslaught to keep Soviet socialism alive for more than seventy years. To be sure, in the Soviet Union’s waning days some, like Boris Yeltsin, crossed over to capitalist ranks, but others continued to resist free-market incursions at great cost to themselves, many meeting their deaths during Yeltsins violent repression of the Russian parliament in 1993.
-Blackshirts and Reds, 1997

>>19895136
>The CIA really fucked up Latin America
>Also Vietnam was an unmitigated moral disaster consisting of non-stop war crimes
>The mass media, instead of being oppositional, did everything in their power to cover for the government
It's iconic for a reason, even though it heavily relies on specific political and historic events, it is still relevant and readable decades later. A must read.

>>19903626
There's a quote in the book about how the press sets the limits of the national conversation so that certain sentiments are INEXPRESSIBLE in polite society. The example would be that it is acceptable to label the Vietnam war as a military blunder or a strategic error, but the extreme degree of the moral failure to even engage in the war was a sentiment which was not allowed air and was only cast as the opinion of fringe hippies or un-American rabble rousers. Omissions, emphasis, spotlight, etc. are tools used to affect these ends.