Propaganda Prisons: Breaking The Bars

By Tom Rizzi

This book discusses the identification, spread, and countermeasures for propaganda presented through technology and in many other aspects of our daily lives.

Social media makes it easy for individuals to create or disseminate propaganda. Media platforms do not encourage independent judgment. They do not present a variety of viewpoints that allow the viewer to investigate all perspectives. Instead, the propagandist, through various methods, uses facts and information selectively, transmitting only those ideas that help accomplish their goal.

Our country is in a crisis with respect to democracy and social change. Much of the information we receive through technology, media, educational institutions, and advertising is presented in such a way as to steer our thought processes in a direction that limits free thinking, alternate perspectives, and factual conclusions. Violence and propaganda are slowly becoming an integrated phenomenon and is being magnified by the use of technology. People are no longer using their minds to fight back. We are in danger of transforming our nation through a deception of acceptance.

Is this behavior an indication of the direction our society is moving toward with respect to the communication of information? This book was inspired by a belief that media and technology have lost their way in the reporting of factual news. Information is now disseminated with a healthy dose of opinion. The ability to distinguish news from opinion and propaganda becomes particularly important when the audience becomes immersed in social, cultural, or political causes.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Covenant Books, Inc.
• Release date: Jul 22, 2021
• ISBN: 9781638143499

Book preview

9781638143499_FC.jpg

Propaganda

Prisons

Breaking the Bars

Tom Rizzi

Cover page graphics by

Andrew Dunn

ISBN 978-1-63814-348-2 (Paperback)

ISBN 978-1-63814-349-9 (Digital)

Copyright © 2021 Tom Rizzi

All rights reserved

First Edition

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods without the prior written permission of the publisher. For permission requests, solicit the publisher via the address below.

Covenant Books, Inc.

11661 Hwy 707

Murrells Inlet, SC 29576

www.covenantbooks.com

Table of Contents

Introduction

A Narrowly Focused View

Empathy and Perspective Taking

Empathy through Questioning

Ideology, Deception, and Moral Persuasion

Reporting News or an Agenda

Free Speech and Propaganda

Propaganda and Emotion

Shadow Government, Disinformation, Misinformation

Advertising

Algorithms and Memes

Who’s at the Helm?

Election Impact

Truth versus Alternative Truths

Misinformation and Alternate Viewpoints

Culture, Propaganda, and Fact Bubbles

Diversity, Conformity, Purpose, Organization

Information Assimilation

Capitalism and Democracy

Ideology and the Media

Campus Bias and Partisanship

Issues: Second Amendment, National Debt, Censorship

Propaganda Prisons

Politics, Media, Democracy

Delivering the Message

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

One-Sided Approaches

Propaganda Impact and Influence

Theater

Music

Art

Movies

Religion

Education

Finance

Health

Fashion

Legal System

Race and Racism

Immigration

Freedom

History

War and Peace

The Lottery

War on Drugs

Science

Love and Hate

Journalism

COVID-19

What Will the Future Be Like?

About the Author

To Walter Cronkite (1916–2009), the most trusted man in America—authentic, factual, accurate. Thank you for having been my greatest inspiration.

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

—Isaiah 5:20

Introduction

This book discusses the existence and spread of propaganda through technology, as well as its role in most other aspects of daily life.

The material limits itself to the discussion of four major topics: uncovering propaganda; enhancing ability to identify propaganda; its use in technology, media, and other sectors of life; and the use of fact checking, empathy, and perspective taking as a defense against propaganda messaging.

Other than the label, fake news is nothing new. It has been a constant companion of information for centuries. What is relatively new is its latest means of communication—the Internet and media platforms. Quite often, they are abused to spread lies and misinformation.

Our country is under immense pressure with respect to democracy and social change. The overall situation that has emerged is deeply concerning. The exploitation of information coupled with personal vulnerabilities is manipulated in such a way so as to limit thought processes, different perspectives, and deductive conclusions. The influence threats being used have to be examined and understood and must be answered with counterstrategies that can minimalize the efforts of the propagandist. Unless we act now, we will continue to place ourselves in danger of transforming our nation through a deception of acceptance.

There is a stark reduction in public trust, an increased lack of respect for authority, an uptick in anti-American rhetoric and antidemocratic philosophy. Young adults display lower levels of attachment to our country’s history, traditions, and religious affiliations. It is my belief that both cultural and religious factors have a prominent impact on our ability to live in harmony. These interactive basics of unity are sometimes being denied altogether. If left unchecked, the political and cultural turmoil we are currently experiencing will destroy the aspirations we hold for a better future. It is my hope that this book helps the reader to better understand the uncertainty we face, and the effect of propaganda on our lives, beliefs, norms, and values.

A Narrowly Focused View

This book is not only about propaganda but also shares certain aspects as well. It was written with a biased belief that we have to change the way we accept information. There is a point being made in the book, as well as an argument to support that point. This is not an interpretive piece. It leads you down a specific path with a definitive conclusion. It has as its mission to clarify. The reader, upon finishing this book, should have a clear perspective on how the presentation of information, not only the information itself, affects our thinking.

In simple terms, the idea behind all propaganda is to make you believe something based on bias or deceit. Quite a bit of everyday life becomes involved with its use. It always has a goal or purpose. To understand the outcome is secondary to understanding the mechanisms used. The purpose can either result in a positive or negative outcome. But the main focus should remain on the methods utilized. Whether it is used for the common good or as a tool to promote a false construct is not the main topic. What should be emphasized is that all propaganda, both negative and positive, has both an origin and reason behind it and that requires our utmost attention. In today’s media, we are overwhelmed with information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, that is used to promote a particular political cause or point of view. The propaganda promoter uses ideas, catchphrases, or words with the intention of achieving a specific goal. For example, in the realm of advertising, we have propaganda that is used to promote products or ideas that are generally acceptable and noncontroversial. We all become subject to the promotion of the latest technology or must-have fashion. The reason propaganda has fostered a more negative than positive connotation is that it is deceitful and boils down to a subversive effort to promote. It never uses a wide-angle lens. The real purpose, quite simply, is to imprison the mind using a narrow frame of information.

The propaganda process, as stated, does not always promote a negative influence. It can be used by governments, medical, business establishments, and other groups to promote a positive message and lifestyle. It plays a very big role in many of the decisions made by those individuals that comprise its audience. Propaganda can have an influence on the choices we make and the attitudes we form with respect to contentious issues and problems both cultural and political. It has helped transform our society in a way that makes it harder for people to reach an unbiased conclusion. It exerts influence and control over what people believe, how people analyze, what they buy, and how they live their lives. It becomes a prison without visible bars.

People rely on information to determine what they want to purchase. Commercials about cars, phones, or medications stress the positive aspects of the product. If the advertiser has to embellish or, for that matter, convince the public into making a purchase, they do so. What is not stressed in many commercials is the possible negative or unsatisfactory outcome of a purchase or product. We are treated to generic labeling that covers that possibility: Individual results may vary is a great one, as well as may be harmful to your health or may cause serious injury. But these may labels fail to convey sufficient detail. As with all information, it is up to the consumer to do the research, homework, and investigate reviews.

As one example, bicycles offer enjoyment, exercise, or transportation. But you may never hear a bicycle- or bike-sharing business inform you about the increased risk of possible facial and head injuries. In 2018, 857 bicyclists were killed in traffic accidents, and there were over forty-nine thousand injuries. Bikes do not come with a warning label, like can be a leading cause of preventable accidents. The argument can be made that practically anything you do can be dangerous. How many people are killed or injured simply crossing the street? But there is a difference in levels of control and occurrence. The suggestion for bicyclists to wear a helmet helps narrow the focus, ease concerns, mitigates anxiety, as well as being a method of controlling risk. In addition, bicycle infrastructure, in many cases, leaves a lot to be desired, as well as drivers who are not cautious or disobey traffic laws; and both are usually not mentioned. I am not saying avoid biking. I am saying be aware of all factors involved. Analysis and investigation are the only venues to ascertain all the components involved in this sport as well as others.

This same method of constricting focus is used to influence opinions and ideas as well. The propaganda of omission can impact both our objectivity and response. Social media is undeniably a major source of disinformation, which has become a steady part of our media diet. The First Amendment and Freedom of Speech limit most controlling factors. Even scientific truth can be used as a tool for propaganda when it becomes extrapolated from real fact and presented as a causal factor for a media belief. As with consumerism and sports, the information supplied through media and print requires both research and analysis.

Empathy and Perspective Taking

Emotional insight is truly needed to grasp both subtle and complicated feelings. It is through emotional perception or empathy that you experience the feelings of another human being. A very special mode of understanding is involved. Particularly for therapy, the capacity for empathy is an essential prerequisite. This point is well-known in psychoanalysis, and more emphasis should be placed on this subject. It is also an important tool in unmasking the propaganda and disinformation found in social media. There is another important yet distinct social competency—perspective taking (the cognitive capacity to consider the world from another individual’s viewpoint).

Living a life without either empathy or compassion is living a life without a soul. The ability to identify with what someone else is feeling and thinking exists in all of us but in varying degrees and levels. Some people find it very difficult to understand the emotions of others. The expression of kindness or sympathy seems to be less pronounced in our society. The power of a touch, a smile, a kind word, a listening ear, an honest compliment, or the smallest act of caring is being largely replaced by communication through technology which is limiting personal interaction. Although empathy is crucial for social interaction, it can sometimes be unpleasant. If that neuro circuit is hit too frequently through the excessive sharing of others’ negative experiences, it can result in emotional exhaustion. While we are generally pretty cognizant of our own feelings and emotions, placing yourself in someone else’s position can be difficult indeed. The reason for this appears that we all have in common a neurological lever that is activated upon experiencing the distress of another. Research shows this same circuit is self-activated when we see others suffer pain or emotional distress. So, through empathy, seeing the suffering of others causes us to suffer as well. We literally feel for the person in distress. This may be a reason some friends and relatives seem to abandon us when we most need emotional support. A display of emotional distress can become an invitation to close yourself off to the other person. It can result in a lack of empathy and compassion in communication.

Behavioral and cognitive studies and experiments indicate that individuals come to understand the emotional and affective states expressed by others with the help of the neural brain functions that produce similar emotional feelings in themselves. Such a mechanism gives rise to shared feelings, which constitutes one important aspect of empathy, although not the only one. Other components, including people’s ability to monitor and regulate their emotional thought processes to prevent misunderstandings and perceptions in dialogue, are equal and necessary parts of a functional model of empathy.

In 2012, scientists at the Chinese Academy of Sciences found that the brain chemicals of people who habitually used the Internet (to the point of being an addiction) had abnormal connections between the nerve fibers in their brain. These changes are similar to other sorts of addicts, including alcoholics. This can impact communication, relationships, and our day-to-day interactions with others. Is this constantly connected world permanently affecting the way we interact with other humans?

The connected world’s larger behavioral impact is dependent on how we interact with each other on a daily basis. Studies show the effects that phones have when people talk face-to-face. As an example, in one study, one hundred friendly couples were placed in a situation having a ten-minute conversation while their phone was present. Researchers noticed that the individuals still continued to fiddle with their phones. When those same couples conversed without a phone present, their conversations resulted in greater empathy.

Even when they are not in active use or buzzing, beeping, ringing, or flashing, digital devices are representative of people’s wider social network and a portal to an immense compendium of information. With cell phones present, people have the constant urge to seek out information, check for communication, and direct their thoughts to other people and worlds. Their mere presence in a socio-physical milieu has the potential to divide consciousness between the proximate and immediate setting and the physically distant and invisible context.

We are awash in technology. It’s estimated that 93 percent of Americans now use cell phones or wireless devices. And one-third of those people are using so-called smartphones, which means the users can browse the Web and check e-mail on their phones. Most of us spend our days walking around with our noses buried in our cell phones, and we tune out the people who are actually in the same room as us. We seem to have long ago crossed the line as to where doing this stuff has become appropriate and accepted; people take calls while they’re out to dinner, text or check their e-mail while on a date, you name it—all at the cost of empathy.

Prejudice plays an important role in interpersonal sensitivity. In scientific studies, prejudice predicts a reduced mental assimilation of others feelings. We understand the thoughts and feelings of others by using our own mind as a model, and it is an essential aspect of empathy. Research bears this out. Important predictors of empathy are both nonreligious spiritual cognitions and religious spiritual experiences. Both cognitions magnify introspection as part of the process and, therefore, enforce thought based on emotional and spiritual self-awareness.

Empathy is an essential tool in many aspects of social life. Its close relative, compassion, is a feeling of concern for the problems of others. Compassion seldom involves the emotional distress that empathy can foster but rather can elicit a response to help another and at the same time develop a sense of peace and inner satisfaction from easing the suffering of others. However, keep in mind that the two related yet distinct social competencies—perspective taking (the cognitive capacity to consider the world from another individual’s viewpoint) and empathy (the ability to connect emotionally with another individual) are important antecedents to develop emotional understanding. Empathy does not prove nearly as advantageous and at times is detrimental to discovering a possible solution to a disagreement. However, it is my contention that it is a strong precursor for the development of high-level perspective-taking skills. If you think that your emotional finesse could use a little work, maybe it’s time to put your phone away and really listen to the people around you.

When you are empathetic, you emotionally understand what another person is experiencing. Essentially, you are putting yourself in someone else’s position and feeling what they must be feeling.

You are able to see yourself in the other person’s place and feel an emotional connection for what they are going through. The empathy I am referring to is not saying you are praying for the president and later tearing up his State of the Union address.

The ability to feel empathy allows you to experience and understand another’s emotional frame of mind. Appropriate responses flow from those who truly understand and care about how others are feeling and thinking. It helps us with the regulation of our own emotions and promotes helpful behavior toward others. We all have the ability to improve our empathy, but that requires us to acknowledge our biases and move beyond our own emotional vulnerabilities.

To understand the implications caused by the lack of empathy and the inability to view a situation from another’s perspective, we must examine the genesis in the shift away from the capacity for both emotional constructs. We are at a point where we find it very hard to accept the feelings, thoughts, and ideas of someone whose world perceptions may not fit into the construct trench we have formulated in our minds. It is my opinion that 9/11 not only changed the world we live in—it has also changed humanity.

With 9/11, many people have slowly been developing what I call a moral distancing. Moral distancing is further being enhanced with the evolution of technology which reinforces a climate of impersonal, rather than interpersonal, communication. It is a symptom of the illness our nation is now experiencing. In Proverbs, there is the following verse: All the ways of a man are right in his own eyes. This very phrase is the antithesis of empathy. And it is what humanity is currently experiencing. The ideas of universal moral order and moral right are no longer in the forefront of human reasoning. It’s our individual construct of order and right that motivates actions and thoughts. As a nation, we are moving away from a universal definition to an individual definition that feeds into the narrative that defines the way we perceive our world.

When George Washington was inaugurated president at Federal Hall, some of his first words summarized the thought process at that time. The propitious smiles of heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which heaven itself hath ordained. We now have a society where both order and right are being ordained by the media. This is leading our nation to an erosion of not only values but an erosion of hope and ultimately an erosion of faith. It is not my intent to say that everyone needs to put God back into their lives, but it is my intent to say that we have to recognize the power of the moral construct that guided our founding fathers, a moral construct based on God and which is consistently being chipped away. So one might ask, Can we turn this thing around? And my answer is that we have the ability to do so. Although the moral distance that separates us from God is infinite, the moral distance that separates us from order and right is finite, is measurable, and has the capacity to be changed by us. At the end of this book, some suggestions will be presented that perhaps can, indeed, help return us to a higher realm of order and right, of empathy and acceptance of those with conflicting mind-sets from our own, as well as methods of truly analyzing the information we receive.

People of all ages are trying to learn and understand by tuning into social media. It is a fast-growing platform in our society whose main agenda is to tell everyone the right way to behave and more importantly how to think. New things go viral every day, and the trending lists on the various social media platforms perpetuate them. Some of the stories are promoting positive change, while others are attacking either people on a personal level or companies and countries on a national level. The big question is how our ability to empathize is affected by social media. While I believe that media can do amazing things in fighting a common cause or connecting us with people around the world, it can also be a major cause of the death of both empathy and perspective taking.

It is easily understandable, given the current direction of social media, why people are so unable or unwilling to empathize with others on the Internet. Media is a dominant cause of empathy fatigue, which is what occurs when people are constantly bombarded with conflicting stories and eventually get emotionally worn out. We also experience varying levels of compassion fatigue with wars overseas, tragedies at home, and other awful things that occur in the world around us. We see the same thing over and over and eventually lose the ability to empathize. Over time, we become numb to the tragedy around us. Our emotional feelings dissipate quickly. We have to distance ourselves from the tragedies for self-preservation, to not allow the stories to compromise our own emotional well-being.

Another cause of the lack of empathy created by social media is information bias. This occurs when individuals only expose themselves to information that reinforces their own thoughts repeated in the media echo chambers of either increasingly radical or exclusionary thought. In other words, we are able to understand and empathize with the information that we agree with, but when it comes to disagreeable facts, we find ourselves unable to empathize or understand the perspective from which they form, and we become easily capable of demonizing them.

As a personal example, I have a friend whom I interact with weekly on a personal basis. When we are together, both of us try to avoid any discussion of politics. The few times we interacted on that subject, the conversation was uncomfortable for both of us. His mind-set on politics was the antithesis of how I felt about the subject. More importantly, no matter how often I told him I understood his point of view, he could not accept any of the opposing points of view I held and often ridiculed my mind-set. Basically, we were both pointing out facts that supported our views, but to him, his facts were the only ones that mattered. We experienced a situation that oftentimes resulted in a demonization process—two fairly intelligent people resorting to this kind of behavior. The situation was somewhat improved by our mutual acknowledgment that we can maintain our friendship by agreeing that we both share a right to disagree which I never questioned in the first place. However, this truce has led to the almost total avoidance of the subject altogether—what I term a lose-lose situation. We will go on being friends, but neither of us will be able to ever share perspective or understanding when it involves certain subjects. Neither one of us will be able to share our thought processes when it comes to those topics. Now multiply this situation by millions and millions of others experiencing the same dilemma. With certain topics, we have agreed to maintain a state of cognitive paralysis.

In the media, there are three levels of news. Starting with the lowest level, we have what has been termed fake news. When you move to a level above, you reach an area of official news. The next level, which is the rarest, is the real news or news that is unadulteratedly factual, unencumbered by human emotion or motivated truths. As an example, in the area of UFO phenomena, we deal on levels of fake news or official news but almost never reach the third level.

Media personalities, as well as politicians and students, should be required to take a course in empathy and perspective taking. Those in positions of power and privilege are most times the least empathetic and unable to accept an alternate perspective. To view a concern or problem from someone else’s perspective is, indeed, becoming a rare attribute. There appears to be what I call a discerning empathy in place. It is easier to empathize with people who are similar to you and harder to empathize with those who are different from you. It is no longer our problem to fully understand a situation that requires our cooperation. What comes to mind, as an example, is the callous behavior of students on spring break during the beginning of the COVID-19 virus epidemic. They pretty much ignored health requests to isolate themselves, thus forcing spring break states to close their beaches. Empathy and perspective taking are not natural inclinations on the part of humans. The new rule for empathy seems to be that it should be reserved just for those who are most like us.

Empathy through Questioning

Empathy is a broad concept that refers to both the cognitive and emotional reactions of an individual to the feelings, thoughts, and experiences of another. Having empathy increases the likelihood of helping others by showing compassion and understanding. It always helps when we can put ourselves in someone else’s mind-set in looking at an observable situation. That does not necessarily mean that you have to agree with the other person; but empathy helps us understand the perspectives, needs, and intentions of others. It plays a crucial role in human, social, and psychological interaction during all stages of life. It helps us to communicate our ideas in a way that makes sense to others and helps us understand others when they communicate with us. Many people believe turning off one’s feelings and creating an emotional distance will help them remain objective and equip them to change the thought process of another individual. In doing so, those you communicate with become distrustful, disgruntled, and less cooperative. And it makes for lonelier, less effective, and more burned-out relationships moving forward.

Empathy and the lack of empathy were crucial ingredients in the 2016 election results. The outcome was shocking to most people in our country on both sides of the aisle. We have also seen this play out on the world stage in England. A lack of empathy in the Brexit election recently produced a similar outcome. Pollsters and political party leaders didn’t understand voters. Politicians spent more time criticizing than listening to each other. Citizens have taken sides and set up simplified caricatures of others without fully seeking to understand them. There is a drastic need for more empathy in the political realm, but we also need more empathy in all aspects of life.

Empathy and perspective taking are the most underused and underdeveloped skills for communicating, building trust, influencing, and resolving conflicts. It is a fundamental and powerful tool in the understanding of a problem. If success in life and work is about building effective relationships, then success in relationships is about building empathy.

Put yourself in another person’s shoes. Identify and understand the thoughts, feelings, and experiences of someone else. It doesn’t mean you completely understand, and it doesn’t mean you agree. But in showing empathy, your intention is to understand and seek to help another person feel understood. In media, this happens all too infrequently.

To foster empathy and perspective taking in politics, it is important to address how we communicate our feeling to others. Sometimes, the best way to engage in conversation is through questioning and listening.

The ability to listen to someone else and asking questions to clarify are important communication skills. Many times, the best way to develop collaborative constructive conversations is to offer a little less analysis and ask a few more questions.

Asking effective questions is a key skill to fully understand a problem. At the same time, make your opinion known through the process but not your viewpoint. A viewpoint is the broader particular way you perceive the world. An opinion is the narrower concept encompassing your view about a particular subject. Keep the emphasis on the issue. This means taking the focus away from your viewpoint and place it on the problem or disagreement. Offer your opinion but not your ideology.

To fully understand a concern requires that you move out of your defensive zone and