media theorist here; let's talk about how to talk about propaganda.

hey guys,

so, i've tried making this post several times (pre-Satori) and each and every time it was downvoted and buried by shills before it could gain any traction. but what i'm about to say is vital for all apes to understand as we approach the MOASS.

• TA;DR - this is how propaganda works.

before i begin, i would like all apes to refer to Rule #3 of this subreddit, which states:

3. No FUD, Shills, Bots, Lies, Spam, Phishing

We have a zero tolerance policy with shills, bots, false content, FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt), Spam, and Phishing, and anything else that would undermine the integrity of this sub.

i think we can all agree based on our time here over the last few months that FUD and shill behavior can exist in many different forms. (forum sliding, topic dilution, brigading, etc.) sometimes shills and bots will downvote valuable DD, sometimes they will flood the sub with photos of their votes/the ticker/low-quality memes, etc.

but one of the major glaring blind-spots that i have noticed since the sub's creation is the near-constant posting (and reposting) of inaccurate FUD news stories from sources such as M-rketWatch/B-nzinga/M-tleyF-ol/J-m Cr-mer's tweets, etc.

as someone with a degree in media theory (i have studied the concepts of propaganda and political mythology in intricate detail), i feel it is absolutely necessary to point a few things out with respect to how we, as a community, engage with corporate media sources:

• the mainstream media is NOT on our side.

the publications i've listed above are simply the most egregious offenders, as they have all been revealed to be owned, funded, influenced, and/or linked to the interests of the hedge funds on the short end of the MOASS; but this principle applies to virtually all mainstream media articles being written and disseminated about the squeeze right now. corporate media has an agenda and it's not to tell the truth about what's happening here. their sole function is to help shape a narrative that benefits their monetary interests. they are under absolutely no obligation to report "the truth" as apes see it. they did not tell the truth about the real origins of the 2008 crash and it is naive at best (and dangerous at worst) to assume they will ever tell the truth about the impending MOASS. it isn't because they're "stupid" or "uninformed" or "out of touch" -- this line of thinking assumes incompetence when we should actually be interpreting it as an act of calculated aggression.

• posting links to MSM news articles that contain misinformation within this subreddit is FUD.

let me repeat that: posting. links. to. news. articles. that. contain. misinformation. is. FUD.

that means yes, even if the point of your post is to dunk on how the media is "getting it wrong," the larger, overarching point is that by doing this you are still helping to spread their misinformation.

propaganda is biased or misleading information circulated through some form of mass media with the intent of promoting a political agenda or viewpoint. propaganda is deliberately not objective and is usually part of a larger psychological campaign to influence people toward a specific opinion. it may include outright lies or more subtle misinformation and censorship.

propaganda has taken on a whole new twist with the rise of so-called fake news sites. publishers seeking advertising revenue through page views will create misleading or flat-out incorrect "news" articles with sensational or controversial headlines. once these articles begin circulating on social media platforms, it can be very difficult to verify or disprove them.

hearing a rumor not only has the power to make you think it might be true; particularly in children hearing a rumor can actually implant false memories. perception is a reality—not merely a product of political cynicism, real science exists proving it.

many big corporations and public figures have a policy of never commenting on rumors. it is typically smart because rumors can get stronger when you feed them with attention.

thus, even if you do not believe you are doing any real harm (or "helpfully spreading awareness of their tactics") by pointing out the media's inaccuracies you are merely sending traffic to the site in question, ultimately increasing their click-thru rate and putting money directly into their pockets. (when calculating ad metrics and pageviews, these sites do not care if you're only visiting the site to laugh at it/call it out. a click is still a click and a share is still a share, so every single time you click that copy-link button to share the story in another venue, you are literally doing their dirty work for them.)

• YES, this applies to screencaps too.

"but i'm not posting direct links to FUD, so calm down, it's fine!"

incorrect. consider, what did you have to do in order to get that screencap? that's right, you had to read the source yourself, meaning you are probably vigilantly monitoring the site in hopes of scoring a "gotcha!" moment for karma.

i would very much love for apes to start thinking about combating FUD and propaganda in the same way one would attempt to put out a fire: if something is burning and destroying your house, the way to stop it is to SMOTHER IT, aka: cut off its oxygen. do not blow on it, do not point at it and say, "stop! you're ruining my kitchen!" - SMOTHER THAT FUCKER AND DESTROY IT AT THE SOURCE!

i believe Rule #3 exists in this subreddit for an excellent reason. mods have a keen awareness of the epic levels of fuckery at play here, and i commend them for that. my argument here is based upon the idea that there a subtle, much more insidious FUD campaign at play here, one that apes may be unwittingly engaging in without their knowledge.

• as a personal example, a friend of mine recently became an ape in mid-April. she is a very intelligent person (with a computer science degree and an accounting background) and has been diligently following the sub for the last 6-7 weeks or so. every single day this week she has sent me a screencap or a link to a FUD article with one of two types of comments: either (a) she asks if any of the stuff in the article is true (it never is) or (b) she's attempting to dunk on a misleading story and sharing the link for my approval/commiseration.

• in the case of the former, she saw somebody link to an article discussing B-yond Meat and wanted to verify that, "uh, this... isn't a thing, right?" (nope, never was. 100% FUD.) in the second case, she sent a link to another explicitly misleading article discussing how "DFV's tweets were the cause of the spike yesterday. ha ha, so funny and wrong, right?" in both cases, the FUD was planted right here in the sub, whereupon she took the bait and proceeded to spread it to me. i believe this is what many apes are doing right now, on a grand scale. the end result is that apes spend a majority of their time dissecting/disproving/dunking on FUD from compromised MSM sources, rather than continuing to research and discuss empirical facts about GME, the SEC, etc.

please humor me for a moment while i share some key excerpts from, "The Effects of Participatory Propaganda: From Socialization to the Internalization of Conflicts" (by Gregory Asmolov) this is an excellent piece that thoroughly describes the concept i am trying to explain:

participatory propaganda helps to socialize conflicts and make them part of everyday life. this increasing scope of engagement can also lead to an internalization of conflict, which means that instead of encouraging you to filter alternative sources of information, participatory propaganda aims to reshape your cognitive filters as well as the relationship between you and your environment.

in online environments, the consumption of propaganda is deeply embedded in the structure of social relations, which allows the propaganda to further infiltrate our everyday lives. more important are the ways social media and the spread of online content create opportunities for immediate action: spreading propaganda further, or taking other actions directly suggested by the propaganda.

due to the participatory nature of digital technologies, propaganda distribution, consumption, and participation often share the same platform and are mediated by the same digital devices (such as mobile phones or laptops). the person exposed to propaganda is also offered a selection of actions to carry out (often instantly) in the same virtual environment.

the consequences of these new participatory affordances are particularly visible in the context of conflicts. in his book iSpy: Surveillance and Power in the Interactive Era, Mark Andrejevic points out that "in a disturbing twist to the interactive promise of the Internet, once-passive spectators are urged to become active participants."

today the digital public sphere offers a new set of tools for the manipulation and control of citizen engagement in conflicts. the socialization of conflict is now driven by the content proliferated through social networks, as well as through the digital affordances of online platforms that offer a range of responses to conflict. the role of content in the socialization of conflicts relies on the distinctive nature of social networking platforms that combine the consumption of news with social interaction, and makes social interaction a mechanism of content proliferation.

as a result, one may argue that propaganda has become less interested in changing people’s opinion about a specific object or in convincing people that it is either truth or fiction. The main purpose of 21st century propaganda is to increase the scope of participation in relation to the object of propaganda.

participatory propaganda restores state sovereignty from within. It aims to build walls in the inner spaces of the subject by shaping categories of perception of the environment.

what does this sort of propaganda do to us as a society? It is designed to implement new forms of sovereignty. It is designed to replace networked structures of society with fragmentation and polarization. It helps to pull people apart by forcing them into the role of combatants rather than citizens. It is designed to destroy horizontal relationships that offer alternative sources of information and that can potentially be transformed into independent collective action and a broad opposition to institutional actors. It is designed to divide and rule. It produces a reality with new walls and borders that can sever personal relationships and weaken critical thinking capabilities. Participatory digital propaganda enables the private, everyday identity of users to be occupied and taken over by the institutional actors that propagate it.

the protection of identity in a conflict-prone digital environment may rely on the user’s capacity to control the scale of their engagement in the conflict.

anyway, um, thank you for coming to my TEDTalk. i hope that going forward all apes (and hopefully the mods) will consider the argument i have presented here and come to a similar conclusion, which is that posting links or screencaps to FUD (even if your goal is to complain about it) is just as dangerous as spreading it without context, and should absolutely be considered a violation of r/Superstonk Rule #3.

• PS: if you do not agree with my assessment, that is absolutely fine, it's a free country, i suppose. but i, personally, will be muting and/or blocking any users who continue to post FUD, regardless of the context in which it is being shared. if you are a similarly frustrated ape and wish to try and put a stop to the daily barrage of FUD, i would suggest the (absolutely incredible) Reddit Enhancement Suite, a Chrome extension that allows you to filter out links from specific domains, as well as by keyword, flair, or username. it has dramatically reduced the amount of noise in my feed, and i feel this will be an invaluable tool once things really start to kick off around here. (note: RES only works on the classic version of Reddit desktop, your filters won't carry over to mobile.)

godspeed, and i'll see you monkeys on the moon. 🦍🍌🚀