Digital manipulation to alter Sarah Palin’s world views

Would you be surprised to learn that both ABC and CBS coincidentally managed to edit out of their interviews with Palin those moments when she expressed moderate, hands-across-the-water foreign policy views?  No.  I wouldn’t be surprised either.

Hat tip:  The Anchoress

Be Sociable, Share!
  • 1Lulu

    I am sure Palin has grounds for libel and intentional distortion suits. After watching how the media reports the israeli/palestinian conflict, is this any surprise? But scary, very scary…

  • Oldflyer

    I have not seen the transcripts of the Couric interview. The ABC hatchet job was a dishonest effort to truncate her answers and change their context. Of course the Blabbers and Scribblers have run with the result, e.g. “I can see Russia from Alaska”, knowing full well that her answer went on to use that observation to illustrate how small the world is, the need for free trade, etc.

    This whole campaign has turned into a stomach churning travesty. I am really beginning to fear for our Republic if political candidates can not break through the media stranglehold. I know that we have alternative media, but as I have said so much of this effort is ‘singing to the choir’.

  • Ymarsakar

    I know that we have alternative media, but as I have said so much of this effort is ’singing to the choir’.

    That’s what Al Qaeda thought as Al Anbar was boosting them out of the region.

  • Oldflyer

    Ymarsakar, I don’t follow. Do you not see a problem with getting the message through the MSM filters to most Americans? How many uncommitted people come to sites such as Bookwormroom, American Thinker, Urgent Agenda, etc. with open minds? I faithfully listen to Mark Levin. I value these voices because they help me to retain my sanity. But, I do not think that they are able to counter the MSM with the bulk of the population.

  • Ymarsakar

    But, I do not think that they are able to counter the MSM with the bulk of the population.

    In terms of hammer meeting hammer, no, there can be no true counter-balance in such a fashion. The MSM has a bigger hammer than ours. However, that is what unconventional and guerrilla warfare was designed to do.

    Ymarsakar, I don’t follow.

    To a certain extent, the “choir” is fluid. Depending on what is going on and how things are handled, it can be a private individual seeking to publish things via the internet press (as opposed to the printing press), in which the choir would represent the huge spider web influence of the printing press or it can be the MSM trying to force the Bush administration to sing their tune in 2004 by providing Al Qaeda with spectacular PR.

    Currently, we’re in the same position the Sunnis were pre Al Anbar. We have an annoying sectarian problem, the MSM, which we can not get rid of without unconventional methods. The MSM would represent Zarqawi and the US government would represent the United States Marines. The government can’t squash the MSM because that ends up eliminating the civil rights of everybody, sort of like Marines kicking in everybody’s door, which pisses off everybody and doesn’t even catch all the terrorists in the first place. The people being terrorized and abused by the terrorists may want to fight back but AQ were more ruthless and well armed than the civilians. Just as the MSM has more influence, reach, and power than the average individual citizen of America, even when grouped together.

    The solution is unconventional in the sense that the US Marines could supply the training and firepower that the Sunni civilians lacked, while the Sunni civilians could supply the proper grassroots support and intelligence that the Marines couldn’t get just by hunting terrorists in Al Anbar.

    The trick here is that Bush has currently refused to tap the majority of the President’s power. Given a choice between directly exercising Presidential control and delegating the task to somebody else down the chain, Bush will choose the latter 90 times out of every 100. So currently the American citizen is defenseless against domestic American enemies simply because the Constitutional safeguards designed to protect America against these domestic enemies haven’t been activated in the defense of the people. Since America isn’t run by mob rule, the enforcement of American security is left up to the US President, which would be Bush. But Bush likes to delegate. He has run into the problem, however, that he cannot delegate representing the interests of the American people against the MSM conglomerates that would seek to exploit the American people for ideological purposes to somebody else. Sort of like how a President can’t delegate the power of veto to somebody else, either.

    Do you not see a problem with getting the message through the MSM filters to most Americans?

    While I’m not saying that getting a counter-message out, which is what Blackfive has been doing, is a bad thing in the fight against the Main Sewer Media’s lies and manipulations of ignorant people, I am saying that to truly destroy the MSM’s credibility, both financially and morally, you would have to destroy them with traps. This is not the same thing as pumping out a counter-message.

    The primary weakness with all propaganda operations, MSM based or not, is that not even the best propaganda can convince people that a man who has been decapitated is somehow alive and kicking and that somehow his death was a lie put out by the Republicans. The implicit assumptions behind “he is alive” is just as numerous as the implicit assumptions behind “he is dead”, but you see, only one of them is true. The side with the truth tends to have an easier time of proving their case. Easier time translates to less resources used, less mental stress, and less chance for things like RatherGate.

    How this relates to the MSM works out in this fashion. Given the Left, the Dems’, and the MSM’s focus on producing lies as the only thing they got left in their arsenal, they become more and more vulnerable with the more lies they put out. These lies require support and structure to convince people. But even once they convince people, they have to maintain it or otherwise it’ll blow up in their faces. With every lie they tell, they have to make the rest of the future stories consistent. Eventually they will slip up, like they did before Palin gave her convention speech but after she gave her nomination acceptance speech.

    The reality, the reality Republicans make by doing things, is far too powerful for propaganda messages based upon lies to hold back from the people. It is simply too complex and demanding in terms of manpower, consistency, power, and control: not to mention competency, which is one thing the Left is sort of getting short on lately.

    Now, with that being said, I obviously recognize that the Left has a couple of benefits not normally seen. Their true believers can switch around their thinking so that inconsistent beliefs and events are perfectly consistent (doublethink). Anything Republicans do, obviously, won’t shake their foundations apart. But that is not relevant. Getting rid of terrorists didn’t mean changing the views of terrorists or even eliminating all of them. Getting rid of terrorists meant getting the people the terrorists have convinced to fight us, on our side fighting for us against the terrorists.

    Given a fight between a superior force and an inferior force, obviously the inferior force will lose out if it tries to go toe to toe with the superior force. That is, however, that strategy and unconventional warfare is for. To even the odds by doing the unexpected and the unconventional.

    Sarah Palin is such a powerful threat and symbol for the Left precisely because people who depend upon lies and illusions really don’t like the true deal hanging around near them.

  • Danny Lemieux

    When I try to discuss Media bias with Democrats (the reasonable ones, that is…which means those that follow the MSM and don’t know better), I try to point out small, easy-to-check aspects of MSM bias, such as Katie Couric’s reference to Biden as “Senator” but leaving off the honorific “Gov” for Palin, like pointing out how the MSM highlights the “R” when bad news can be attributed to Republicans but leaving off the “D” when that is the case with Democrats.

    Sometimes, just small anomalies can open their eyes to the big picture.