Thought police in full force as Google tries to tell you what’s real and what isn’t. Keeps in line with gaming search results that only return pro-Hillary stories as opposed to other search engines.
The tool itself relies on the logical fallacy of appeals to authority. That authority, of course, Google and Hillary!
Have a look at what Google and the media are doing to you. Every single point in the indoctrination list is being used in this campaign.
See:
|
Indoctrination & Propaganda |
Education |
| 1a. One-sided: Different or opposing views are either ignored, misrepresented, under-represented, or denigrated. | 1b. Many sided: Issues examined from many points of view; opposition fairly represented. |
| 2a. Uses generalizations, “allness” statements, and lack of specific references and data. | 2b. Uses qualifiers: Statements supported with specific references and data. |
| 3a. Card Stacking: Data carefully selected – even distorted – to present only the best or worse possible case. Language used to conceal. | 3b. Balanced: Presents samples from a wide range of available data on the subject. Language used to reveal. |
| 4a. Misleading use of statistics. | 4b. Statistical references qualified with respect to size, duration, criteria, controls, source and subsidizer. |
| 5a. Herding: Ignores distinctions and subtle differences. Attempts to bring together superficially similar elements together. Reasons by analogy. | 5b. Discrimination: Points out differences and subtle distinctions. Use analogies carefully, pointing out differences and non-applicability. |
| 6a. False Dilemma (either/or): Only two solutions to the problem or two ways of viewing the issue – the “right way” (writer or speaker’s way) and the “wrong way” (any other way). | 6b. Alternatives: There are many ways of solving a problem or viewing an issue. |
| 7a. Appeals to Authority: Statements by selected authority figures used to clinch an argument. “Only the expert knows” approach. [e.g., Google] | 7b. Appeals to reason: Statements by authority figures and concerned parties used to stimulate thought and discussion. “Experts seldom agree”. |
| 8a. Appeals to consensus or bandwagon approach: “Everybody’s doing it so it must be right”. | 8b. Appeals to fact: Facts selected from broad data base. Logical, ethical, aesthetic and psycho-spiritual aspects considered. |
| 9a. Appeals to emotions and emotional responses: Uses words and pictures with strong emotional connotations. | 9b. Appeals to people’s capacity for thoughtful, reasoned responses: Uses emotionally neutral words and illustrations. |
| 10a. Labeling: Uses labels and derogatory language to describe proponents of opposing viewpoint. | 10b. Avoids labels and derogatory language: Addresses the argument, not the people supporting a particular viewpoint. |
| 11a. Promotes attitudes of attack and/or defense with the aim of selling a position or product. | 11b. Promotes attitudes of openness and inquiry. Aim is to discover. |
| 12a. Ignores assumptions and built-in biases. | 12b. Explores assumptions and built-in biases. |
| 13a. Language promotes lack of awareness and unconsciousness. | 13b. Language usage promotes greater awareness and consciousness. |
| 14a. Can lead to tunnel vision and bigotry. |
14b. Can lead to breadth of vision and understanding. |
| 15a. Referenced studies conceal conflict-of-interest funding sources. | 15b. Referenced studies reveal conflict-of-interest funding sources. |
| 16a. Statistics always presented to show maximum damage from problem and minimum damage from solution. | 16b. Statistics presented to show many aspects of problem, not always from a non-max/min approach. |
Copyright © 1988- 2009 Leading Edge International Research Group
Be the first to comment