Fake News for Big Brother

[David Howe]

at Tuesday, April 29, 2003 6:21 PM, Tim May <timcmay at got.net> was seen
to say:
> If the state has the authority to classify words as "marketing" or
> "news" or "propaganda," all is basically lost.
It is difficult to define a particular piece of data as one of the three as an abstract.
however, you *can* make the distinction between marketing/propaganda and news (although it
is difficult) and the concept of *not* deliberately lieing for political or financial gain
isn't really a hard one.

> And "freedom of the press" is indeed limited to those with presses,
> except presses have long been a nonbarrier to speech, given the
> incredible low cost of mimeograph machines, offset printing, laser
> printing, and so on. And now we have the Net.
*lol*
Make two statements.
put one of them on CNN, the BBC, and all the other "official" news outlets, broadcast it on
the commerical tv/radio channels and internationally recognised print media
take the other and do whatever else you want with it - publish it all over the web, copy off
a few hundred (or thousand) sheets and hand them out in the street; set up a small radio
station and broadcast it to your local neighbourhood, take a megaphone and shout it out in
public places.

Which of the two will 98% of the public believe, and which will be derided as a crackpot
theory (hint, the answer isn't "whichever is true")

remember that more than half of americans are firmly convinced saddam was responsible for
9/11 - despite the media circus blaming it on OBL last year (and they will believe something
else next year, when the US attacks yet another middle east country)