Media Control, Second Edition: The Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda

"The Essence of Society is engineering Consent." --Edward Bernays, adviser to Woodrow Wilson."Media Control" is both brief and informative. The great thing about thi book is you can apply the concepts to instances in the past and present. The omniscient and omnipotent media. It dictates what most of us discuss at the dinner table, or over a cup of coffee or beer. The topics at hand are spoon-fed to us, and often our very own opinions are spoon-fed to us also. Often, we get a narrow pre-defined "choice" of 2 positions to take on these complicated topics. Often the two positions are oversimplified and more nuanced than actually opposing one another. These issues and circumstances are not that simple. But the media constructs and defines the parameters, simplifies and narrows them, and dishes them out to the public. This is the narrow field of play the mainstream media hands to us. We sheepishly accept it, often without being aware of it nor critically thinking about it. Our opinions on these chosen topics are often limited."Media Control" is applicable for the past, present, and future. The rules basically stay the same."Not every item of news should be published. Rather must those who control news policies endeavor to make every item of news serve a certain purpose."-Joseph Goebbels"It is the absolute right of the state to supervise the formation of public opinion." -Joseph GoebbelsRecent real-life instances of "Media Control" include Freedom Fries, pre-emptive attacks, war-mongering, PNAC, and the Neo-con fad that has infiltrated the US government via appointments, and influenced the US public in recent years: A high percentage of the American public according to polling data is not interested in attacking and overthrowing governments in foreign countries. Therefore, the public has to be influenced, excited, and engineered to endorse such endeavors. Fear is the best motivator to influence public opinion.One example cited among many was the American public's perception and belief that Iraq would invade the United States. Iraqi armed forces landing on the shores of New Jersey or California? Imagine that. The Americans had to "fight them [the Sunnis) on their soil or they'd have to fight them on our soil." 7/10 American polled believe Iraq & Hussein were involved in 9-11 during the media onslaught that began with Judith Miller of the NY Times and the GWB administration. The Iraq conflict is near (perhaps) the end of US troop involvement, but it's a great illustraion of Media Control.Another example from this book is former Panamanian ally, Manuel Noriega: a small time operator that dealt drugs in cooperation with the US the government, until he fell out of favor. Noriega was made larger than life. Made into a caricature of a dangerous thug. A threat. The USA removed him and restored power to the 8% white minority elite, having U.S. military officers in positions throughout the government.Before this in the 1980s, there was the Emergency Threat to the United States: Latin American, Lessor Developed Countries, with ill-trained, and ill-equipped armies.Ironically, the Creel Commission (CPI) is noted in "Media Control," and appriately so. The Creel Commission was a propaganda campaign to get the USA involved in WWI. It's widely considered by historians to be the center of the creation of the Public Relations (PR) industry.The media is all-powerful. The thoughts most think, the tenets most believed in, and the words people say, are the words of others.Highly recommended.

Speaking for myself, I get sick when I hear "CNN, The Most Trusted News," and watch Fox and every other mind-melted American media. I have to admit, I also get nauseated (literally) in just the sight of G.W. Bush or any of his administration attempting to tell the "truth." And what's even more disturbing are the supporter's; Blind and angry fighters with bias moral slants and empty slogans. On the other hand, PBS and Comedy Central are refreshing alternative exceptions to all of these deceptions.Chomsky relates two types of democracy - one where the majority of people are politically active participants, heard, listened and considered. The other, which is what we have, is a vanguard or specialized class of representatives that do the voicing for everyone - the only participation of the public during their elections. And this is what has been both in Lenin's and U.S. liberal's idea; that of a specialized vanguard political and business class endorsed to protect the bewildered public who simply can't think for themselves. In this, modern U.S. propaganda had its beginning with Woodrow Wilson's Creel Commission and later Red Scare.While former tactics used have been the Creel Commission and the Red Scare, attacks are still used unions and all political organizations with the separating and isolating of people; distracting them with consumerism, TV sitcoms and the Superbowl - to name only a few. Also the use of catchy and empty phrases as "Do you support the," and "Are you for or against." This is used along with many superficial forms of entertainment, gossip columns, sporting events and many other diversions. The bottom line is a One party system, a One business system, with two divisions of the same party - the Democrats and Republicans.While these distractions and attacks on unions and political organizations have been very successful, they have not broken up the Churches, which act as the few places left for organization and political speeches against propaganda. An example is the recognition that war is wrong, while the government calls those against the Vietnam War part of a Vietnam syndrome, weak and sickly persons.You name it - the Middle East, Central America, National terrorism - it's all been lied upon by our media and governmental official history, including the number killed in Vietnam, declaring less than a million Vietnamese, while other sources reveal millions. What do we think when other countries and groups lie about the amount of people murdered in the Holocaust?It was only until the 1960's that the culture awakened unlike before. Even in highly prejudice and opinionated parts of the country, open talks can now be given. Where formerly there was both the lack of understanding and opposition, now there is still opposition but with much more understanding and at least some type of semi-organizational national movements despite all the media propaganda.In our recent times with unemployment raised, lower wages, loss of health care affordability, dwindling social security, and much more poverty than before, the sitcoms, consumerism and the Superbowl are not enough. The tactics needed are to continually create new enemies to fight, new terror to control and general fear within the public; as in Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden, Castro, Quadhafi, drug traffickers, Arabs - all with our magnificent military force that wipes out these supposed tyrannies - in reality they are weak third world armies - all acting as distractions and diversions from the real truth; U.S. imperialism and abuse of labor and natural resources by the few powerful and wealthy. Cuba is likely to be next. In an effort to gain control over labor and natural resources and prevent economic independence, the strategy is to first provoke them. And then when they act under defense, they are set-up under the lie of offence as reported by the media, demanding that we defend and brilliantly crush them under patriotic morals and values. "God Bless America." Now we can all relax with a sigh of relief now that this terrible dictatorial tyranny has been eliminated and decent human rights and values have been restored.9. While the media widely publicized the jail and torture of the former Cuban prisoner, Armando Valladares, and the U.S. both commending him for his courage and then appointing him as a representative of the UN human rights commission, a much more detailed, mountainous evidence of signed affidavits of human rights commission members in El Salvador imprisoned and tortured by the U.S., and acquired by Hebert Anaya were entirely ignored by the media. Only one small blurb mentioned. And when finally released from prison, he was quietly assassinated by U.S. backed security forces.People who were polled responded against countries that occupy others illegally and perform human rights abuses. And yet all over the globe, both the U.S. and U.S. backed forces do just that, an example being the U.S. backed invasion, torture and killings of Indonesia to those in East Timor, killing over 200,000, while the media remains silent. And while Israel occupies Lebanon illegally against UN resolution 425, with U.S. backing, killing over 20,000 in Beirut, hospitals and vital centers, there is no media coverage.Over the years, the media refused to report to the public the critical voices of the Iraqi democrats around the world since they condemned the U.S. friendly relations with Saddam Hussein. Only after Saddam became the enemy were their voices given any coverage. But no sooner did they voice their antiwar sentiments and opinion against imperialistic maneuvers; they were again completely ignored by the media. You can only read about them in some of the German and British press. What does this say of our democracy?Chomsky gives the reasons U.S. gave for the Gulf War; Aggressors can not be rewarded and must be reversed by violence. And yet the U.S. does this all the time and no one questions their aggressions, as in their 20 years of quiet diplomacy (no attack) of South Africa's killings, 1.5 million in just the Bush-Reagan years. Again no media coverage, a hallmark sign of a totalitarian and bias culture.While two-thirds of Americans polled favored peace negotiations with Iraq, the media continued to drill the government's view of no diplomacy. Meanwhile Iraq had offered total withdrawal, and again no coverage. Any who thought of negotiations were made to feel like oddballs since the media shows that no one thinks this way. And no Democrat dared speak up either.While the U.S. blocks sanctions against Israel for her defying the UN in illegally occupying Lebanon since 1978, it hypocritically employs sanctions against Cuba and Iraq. And these have worked, weakening Iraq tremendously. Negotiations are offered by Iraq, but Bush refuses for the same economic exploitative reasons in a small country torn by a war with Iran. And now suddenly it is a dangerous power that threatens the entire world with lies about stockpiles of chemical weapons and WMD. The same exact tactics were used only a year earlier on Nicaragua's Manual Noriega, deceptively elevated to a large and dangerous drug trafficking threat to the world. But he had to be smashed, killing hundreds, maybe thousands of people, and restoring a vicious police state. History repeats itself.It's all about whether we want a pseudo democracy of representatives and servitude or a free democracy of active citizen participation. These are our choices.

If it were any other author, I would say, "show me your sources." But it's Chomsky, and he's already written enough books showing his sources. This one isn't meant to be a footnoted volume of case-and-point. It's just a nice high-level essay highlighting the absurdity of the rhetoric of our times. I do have one complaint though. I wish this focused a little bit more on the media than the government. Chomsky blends the two together and speaks of one as if it's the other. Hmmmm...on second thought, maybe he did that on purpose.Anyway, a light read for Chomsky fans and a nice intro for those unfamiliar with his work.

Like all of Chomsky's books, he does his research and distills the core elements and paints a very accurate picture that the average person can understand, although its written (by today's standards of 2025) slightly above the average reading level. This book deserves to be read by those interested in advertising, propaganda, and the crowd mindset

Though this is a quick fast read, it is great material. And if you are curious about how media and propaganda are intertwined, this may just convince you about what we always suspected. As a great friend of mine once quipped: "why do you think they call it programming?"

Dr Chomsky writes about the complicity of the media ignoring stories that were not in perceived American interest. I have no reason to doubt their validity. However in typical fashion, Dr. Chomsky’s revelations are to the point of “bitching,” and at some point actually agreed that the media did the right thing,