If only one single university would allow me to do research in the (systemic) history of propaganda as a ‘science’.
But doing so would anger professors in propaganda.
They cant justify their ‘persuasive’ equation
“communicating= propaganda”.
And nobody should ask for it!
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
Trump does it by the book.
By a lot of books actually.
He does his pr according to nearly all university handbooks on propaganda (Sender Message receivers).
But nobody may critisise propaganda as a ‘science’ and systemic tool of the financial elite (who own our media).
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
I repeat:
As long as Tesla maintains its ties with a clear fascist, sales of his cars will not increase. Today fascism has become a “corporate value” of Tesla.
Think about that awful marketing proposition… Is it ‘optimal’?
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
(is an enigma in propaganda as a ‘science’)
“Making facts fit a Narrative” and “creating alt facts to support a Narrative” is a ‘science’ all in its own(!).
Its called ‘persuasive communications’, wherein persuading is more important than showing the proof. (Media scholars cant be bothered with proving #whatcommunicatingsignifies).
Checking the science is not a matter of agreeing with a narrative.
It’s about checking the (scientific!) proof. And when Aristotle is the only ‘hard’ proof on offer in ‘communication’ sciences, then you cannot but distrust the ‘science’.
#whatcommunicatingsignifies (is an enigma in media studies.)
Sounds like media studies aka ‘communication’ ‘sciences’. Here the marketing proposition IS ‘multidisciplinary’, but Method is irrelevant here. That’s why ‘communication’ is ‘defined’ here as ‘unknowable’…
Which can easily pass as #mysticism.
#whatcommunicatingsignifies (It isn’t a sent ‘message’.)
But according to media mystics, cq professors in the ‘unknowable’(!), #fuelling #emotions (such as anger and polarisation) are the #only #way #up in ’persuasive communications’.
#systemic #conundrum
#whatcommunicatingsignifies (is unknown in media studies. Here, Aristotle is still the Bagwan.)
A message to all from a great individual, just another human being like you and me:
We are all part of nature and play a role in nature.
(This is contradicted by scholars in propaganda, who argue that the economic system is as natural as lying for profit.)
#whatcommunicatingsignifies (in nature)
Science is about proving stuff.
Propaganda is about pushing an idea or ideology that doesnt require proof.
Now.
What happens if you elevate propaganda to being a ‘science’?
#whatcommunicatingsignifies is an enigma in propaganda as a ‘science’.
@neildegrassetyson.com
Censoring facts, in order to control a Narrative is called a ‘strategy’ in ‘persuasive communications’. Like blaming and shaming are.
You can become professor in propaganda (Sender Message receivers), including censoring, provided you have enough “likes” from media peers…
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
In propaganda (Sender Message receivers) as a ‘science’ la, aka ‘communication sciences’, behavior is an enigma.
It cannot be ‘the communication’. And what “a communication” might be is merely a philosophical conundrum which doesnt require proof to tell stories about.
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
In content marketing, business storytelling, pr, ‘persuasive communications’, framing, nudging, spinning or ‘weaving’ - as TACO calls it - any ‘clue’ points at the dreamt returns of financial benefits from intentionally lying in the media.
It’s even a ‘science’!
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
This is a #typical #systemic #perspective, which (therefore) focusses only on technologies.
While.
In 'communication' 'sciences' Aristotle's "Retorica" is still used as if it were 'scientific' and 'proof'.
Technology is sexyer to build narratives about though,
I know...
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
In propaganda (Sender Message receivers) as a ‘science’, every “communication” is an enigma. Media scholars dont define stuff, don’t test their ‘theories’, frame “rhetorics” as ‘communication’ and Aristotle as ’proof’.
Populists like Trump do their pr ”by the book”.
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
It’s funny (not), that in PR/opaganda as a ‘science’ the word “communication” can mean anything you want it to mean. No proof or definitions required. Aristotle’s blessing is sufficient here, as ‘proof’.
Still, we call PR a ‘science’.
@academicsky.org
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
It is a systemic taboo to do research into proaganda as a ‘science’.
But it is allowed to complain about consequences, yes. You may even call complaints research. As long as you stay well away from tackling a ‘science’ that certifies in framing alt facts with a purpose.
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
How did television sink so low?
Dive into the #origins and rapid growth of #propaganda and #dumbing #down as a ‘science’.
You’ll find a treasure of leads and facts that can provide verifiable answers.
(But you won’t of course.
I knów.)
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
In the ‘science’ of propaganda (Sender Message receivers) it is impossible to distinguish fact from fiction. Media scholars believe in Aristotle after all and do not require any other ‘proof’ than citing Aristotle… Scholars call propaganda ‘persuasive communication’.
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
Dive into propaganda (Sender Message receivers) as a ‘science’. You’ll find most answers to our systemic media questions there.
#whatcommunicatingsignifies is an enigma in a ‘science’ which swears by quoting Aristotle as ‘proof’. Media scholars imply that we still live in the Bronze Age…
Add to that:
According to propaganda as a ‘science’, the highest bidder in media push and ownership determines the media facts… Only the status quo is allowed to ‘desinform’. Media scholars call this ‘persuasive communications’.
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
This would mean that the general public is more savvy than the obese media entourages around leadership, which today looks for tribal ‘solutions’ to global challenges and is pushed by media mystics to frame their systemic patriotism in ever louder and more extreme ways.
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
I doubt the author has included propaganda as a ‘science’ in his story. It’s taboo to address faculties which certify in framing lies in the media, as a ‘science’…
#whatcommunicatingsignifies (is a mystical mystery in all curricula around framing alternatives for facts as ‘doing the communication’).
In media studies and practice it is as if it is 1990, internet doesnt yet exist and audiences should just listen.
But then, in mediastudies, Aristotle is still adored like a god and regarded as more ‘scientific’ than proving even one single of the 100s of ‘theories’…
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
Belief systems are simply to believe in. And not to check on their factuality.
The less educated we are thru dumbing down, the easier it’ll become to manipulate beliefs. This is what ‘persuasive communications’ endorses, as a ‘science’…
#whatcommunicatingsignifies (is an enigma in mediastudies.)
Well…
Try to get this between the ears of evangelists of #artificial #ignorance and the university preachers of the #dumbing #down norm in media and education.
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
In “The Art of Persuasion”, selling a narrative IS called an “art”. But a Narrative fires in two directions. It can backfire.
Scholars in framing tend to blame backfire on ‘audiences’. Mind you, they never have to account for
#whatcommunicatingsignifies. That is a mystery in media ‘sciences’…
Media managers share the belief that ‘not communicating’ is a ‘strategy’.
Yet it is impossible to not-communicate. Everything communicates! Always. Everywhere.
Media scholars disregard always and everywhere. For them only “media visibility” counts as ‘communication’.
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
According university handbooks on “controlling the narrative” censorship is just one of the justified(!) tactics propaganda managers have in their “media mix”…
Do you want more ethical media? Start with unpacking what ‘persuasive communications’ as a ‘science’ propagates.
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
Ask miss Von der Leyden...
Just observe how her media entourage of professional nudgers and spinners will frame the ever twisted ways out of yet another conondrum.
"A communication" is never(!) a 'sent Message'.
#whatcommunicatingsignifies
