Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
24. Seventeen techniques for truth suppression
Mon Dec 30, 2013, 07:38 AM
Dec 2013

Last edited Mon Dec 30, 2013, 02:02 PM - Edit history (2)

Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression*
http://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5

Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.

1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.

2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "How dare you?" gambit.

3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors." (If they tend to believe the "rumors" it must be because they are simply "paranoid" or "hysterical.&quot

4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.

5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nutcase," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and, of course, "rumor monger." Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the "more reasonable" government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to shoot down.

6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).

7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.

8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."

9. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hangout route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.

10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.

11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If evidence exists that the Vince Foster "suicide" note was forged, they would have reported it. They haven't reported it so there is no such evidence. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press who would report the leak.

12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. E.g. If Foster was murdered, who did it and why?

13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing distractions.

14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as "bump and run" reporting.

15. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the "facts" furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.

16. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges "expose" scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.

17. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, "What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?" Don t the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.

_____________________________________________________
*Thanks to Matariki for reposting this list recently.

Nor should you! hrmjustin Dec 2013 #1
Never apologize for standing up for what you believe. crazy homeless guy Dec 2013 #2
No one is asking you to. WowSeriously Dec 2013 #3
Uh ok billhicks76 Dec 2013 #4
I am completely with out on that. WowSeriously Dec 2013 #12
And I won't apologize for calling Blue Dog policies useless. [n/t] Maedhros Dec 2013 #5
I'm with you on that. WowSeriously Dec 2013 #13
I wouldn't say "useless." I would say "predatory." woo me with science Dec 2013 #37
+8,749 Scuba Dec 2013 #43
Predatory is a better description. Maedhros Dec 2013 #56
Nobody asked you to. Le Taz Hot Dec 2013 #6
As a liberal who supports public education, no cuts to Social Security, help for unemployed.... madfloridian Dec 2013 #7
I am with you on that. WowSeriously Dec 2013 #14
What is a "progressive litmus test"? Is it too demanding? madfloridian Dec 2013 #8
Apparently the litmus test is: Maedhros Dec 2013 #15
I think the litmus test is supporting Democratic values WowSeriously Dec 2013 #16
It is refusing to cut down the party treestar Dec 2013 #21
It's not my job as the opposition to the Republicans to advocate for Republicans Bluenorthwest Dec 2013 #35
+8,749 Scuba Dec 2013 #44
North Carolina Republicans didn't give everyone a voice... WorseBeforeBetter Dec 2013 #54
I won't apologize for being a progressive liberal tblue Dec 2013 #9
I am with you on that. WowSeriously Dec 2013 #17
I refuse to apologize for being a Liberal. Rex Dec 2013 #10
I am with you on that. WowSeriously Dec 2013 #18
We have nothing to Cha Dec 2013 #11
You mean like Max Baucus? Enthusiast Dec 2013 #19
No they are not treestar Dec 2013 #22
I'll tell you what is ridiculous. Your post. Enthusiast Dec 2013 #23
It is ridiculous and also a tag team tactic, the OP was a 'drive by' and so someone Bluenorthwest Dec 2013 #33
No, pal. I went to bed after I posted, then went to work. Now I'm here. OmahaBlueDog Dec 2013 #48
By failing to support electable (if by your standards) imperfect Dems in purple districts OmahaBlueDog Dec 2013 #52
I'd always rather have somone who will support placing Dems in party leadership positions OmahaBlueDog Dec 2013 #49
Oh BULLSHIT. There would never have been a chance to PASS it and you know it. If you don't have a RBInMaine Dec 2013 #26
Oh, bullshit back at you. How big is the tent when we don't allow a discussion on a health care Enthusiast Dec 2013 #29
Silly. The insurance corporations were allowed to discuss it with Max. They are people too. L0oniX Dec 2013 #50
I'll never apologize for being a BobUp Dec 2013 #20
Seventeen techniques for truth suppression woo me with science Dec 2013 #24
Excellent post. Thanks. n/t Laelth Dec 2013 #28
^^^this^^^ deserves its own op. L0oniX Dec 2013 #51
So, you're saying I'm waxing indignant? OmahaBlueDog Dec 2013 #53
That is one good list. Thorough. Enthusiast Dec 2013 #58
Oh dang, someone made a list! Jester Messiah Dec 2013 #65
Makes sense, this being DEMOCRATIC Underground and not "PURIST Underground" as some want it to be. RBInMaine Dec 2013 #25
Nor should you. Laelth Dec 2013 #27
Good quote. nt TBF Dec 2013 #30
Curses on Truman for creating that divisive statement treestar Dec 2013 #38
LOL. Laelth Dec 2013 #40
This strikes me as an affected posture. Has anyone ever actually asked you such a Bluenorthwest Dec 2013 #31
It was also a hit-and-run OP. Laelth Dec 2013 #32
I did notice. I also notice that the understudy is not very good. Bluenorthwest Dec 2013 #34
A lot is from 3rd party folks who could care less of representation in red districts/states. great white snark Dec 2013 #36
How about apologizing for drive by hit and run threads? hootinholler Dec 2013 #39
I didn't ask you to. LWolf Dec 2013 #41
K & R Scurrilous Dec 2013 #42
Jeepers! OmahaBlueDog Dec 2013 #45
My turn to say "Jeepers" madfloridian Dec 2013 #46
I refuse to apologize for being a Democrat who votes his principles. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2013 #47
Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 2013 #55
I take it this means you won't be donning the hair shirt and undertaking the self-flagellation? Jester Messiah Dec 2013 #57
Really that's not my scene OmahaBlueDog Dec 2013 #60
Those you mentioned in your second sentence are the ones who owe all of us an apology! calimary Dec 2013 #59
Damn straight! OmahaBlueDog Dec 2013 #61
And they better NOT call themselves Christians, because if they sneer at the poor, calimary Dec 2013 #63
I'm not sure what this is about but I'm recing just because of the nasty comments you got Number23 Dec 2013 #62
Happy New Year! OmahaBlueDog Dec 2013 #64
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I refuse to apologize for...»Reply #24