Mind Control and Manipulation By Mainstream Media
Military Psychological Operations
Military PSYOP is a field of persuasive communications. It involves the implementation and evaluation of persuasion among people. Its objective is to influence the attitudes of people to further national goals. PSYOP can modify the attitudes, behaviors, and emotions of a target.
It seems we have all heard about how years ago, during military conflicts, the US would print and distribute pamphlets, releasing them out of airplanes in the enemy territory. They would fly over areas and release propaganda information supporting military operations. It began in Korea in 1951. Later psychological warfare wained, but then in 1984, the Department of Defense was told to rebuild its military PSYOP capabilities. A significant evaluation took place. When they evaluated the department’s psychological operations, they concluded that DOD’s PSYOP capabilities had been neglected during the seventies. Updates were completed in almost every area.
2018 – Civil-Military Operations (CMO). CMO are the activities performed by military forces to establish, maintain, influence, or exploit relationships between military troops and indigenous populations and institutions (IPI). CMO support US objectives for the host nation (HN) and regional stability.
Strategic Aspects of CMO – Frequently, the threat will use common culture, religion, generosity, and coercion to destabilize or depose legitimate governments and then exploit their success to advance political goals and objectives. These tactics can sometimes inspire support from local civilian populations. – JP 3-57, Civil-Military Operations, 9 July 2018
PSYOP in Mainstream Media and Advertising today
Part of the use of PSYOP in the military is to collect information and analyze its target for susceptibilities and vulnerabilities. Mainstream media and advertising agencies employ the same tactics. Propaganda messages are developed, tested, then used on the target population to influence thoughts, emotions, and behaviors.
We are, to no small extent, emotional. We are more influenced by people giving testimonials and emotional appeals—even if they are illogical concerning a purchase. We are very much influenced by the character and or the appearance of the presenter than what they say to us. News anchors are chosen based upon several traits that would build a rapport with their audience. Did you ever meet someone you did not like at all, yet they were an expert in their field? Where you less likely to respect their opinions because you did not like them? We also question the opposite. When speaking to someone you hold in high regard, your view of their beliefs could be the opposite of the scenario mentioned above.
Mass media often targets and influences opinion leaders. Opinion leaders are much more influential on changing than when the mass media tries to change the population’s minds. We trust the leaders, and they can influence us much more.
Leaders and people such as news anchors can have a significant impact on our thoughts and they know it. We look to leaders for their views and opinion, and we believe them more quickly than people we are not familiar with. When they convince a leader to tell us something or in certain cases pay them to tell us what it is that they want them to convince us, we have an easier time taking the information in as factual and not questioning it.
Did you know that all of your news that is broadcast around the United States comes from only three sources? Most people would think that the new stories are all independent of the other channels you watch, but they are not. The press releases are prerecorded and distributed around the country. Did you ever see the Utube video where major new stations all repeat the same exact Easter bunny line? You can watch it here.
This is why they call it programming. Television teaches you what to think, feel and even say. This is why we are one of the unhealthiest nations in the world.
The Relationship between Television Viewing and Unhealthy Eating: Implications for Children and Media Interventions
We found that television viewing during childhood and adolescence was related to a more unhealthy diet in early adulthood. This relationship, however, was not explained by permissive parenting or knowledge about nutrition. Instead, the belief that unhealthy, highly advertised foods taste great, the message commonly promoted in children’s food advertising, was most strongly associated with unhealthy diet in young adults. Parents who teach their children to question the messages they see on television may attenuate this relationship, but the direct link between prior television exposure and diet remained.
There is emerging evidence that social eating norms may play a role in the development and maintenance of obesity. Quite a bit of effort has gone into studying why we eat the way we do. The studies conclude that we are influenced by other in the way we eat. Social Influences on the way we eat.
The Relationship between Television Viewing and Unhealthy Eating: Implications for Children and Media Interventions
Prior television experience continued to predict unhealthy food preferences and diet in early adulthood, and perceived taste had the most direct relationship to both healthy and unhealthy diets. In addition, both television experience and parenting factors independently influenced preferences and diet. These findings provide insights into the potential effectiveness of alternative media interventions to counteract the unhealthy influence of television on diet, including nutrition education, parental communication and media literacy education to teach children to defend against unwanted influence, and reduced exposure to unhealthy messages.
