My work is on propaganda. My statements here are about propaganda. I am writing a book on the real origin, nature, and effects of propaganda. I said that this was propaganda because I myself have plenty of experience with presenting data. I have personal knowledge of the subject. Why do I need to go look for "peer-reviewed papers" when I have decades of experience in a professional capacity? I can give any level of argument, explanation, or evidence you wish on my own.

If your understanding of the subject was such that you could find your own peer-reviewed papers on the topic, what were you asking for? You sounded like the idea of this being propaganda (a form of communication intentionally designed to create specific beliefs and/or reactions in a population) was new to you. I was trying to point you in the right direction. Since you seemed skeptical, I showed you that one of the most famous books ever written on the topic of numerical/statistical data presentation had an entire chapter dedicated to the intentional fuckery in this specific type of graph.

These graphs are designed to be divisive and obfuscatory. Our world works by intentional division and lying by half-truths. For example, the entire concept of "the left" and "the right" are purposeful contrivances to keep us divided; to show us an enemy, so we don't look at the real enemy; the man behind the curtain. This division is accomplished by media showing two different true stories, full of half-truths and a narrative overlay (lies of context and propaganda) on both sides. The real zinger is the specific narrative "the other side is lying." Such statements of "the other side" are constant. At least once every 30 seconds on any news program you will hear a statement to that effect. The crazy thing is, they are all correct.

If you wish to know more about such topics, I can give you a metric fuckton of research, though perhaps you can just read my book when it comes out, which will hopefully be this week (at least the first half of Part 2).

Here is Part 1. It was written for a specific audience (Gamestop) and isn't (yet) about propaganda at all. It is rather a necessary first step to getting people to see a certain aspect of Reality that is otherwise completely hidden: The Matrix, which is the title of Part 2. A rewritten Part 1 will be included with Part 2 which takes out most of the GME specific stuff and gives a more compelling intro because my target audience is the whole world.

My work is on propaganda. My statements here are about propaganda. I am writing a book on the real origin, nature, and effects of propaganda. I said that this was propaganda because I myself have plenty of experience with presenting data. I have personal knowledge of the subject. Why do I need to go look for "peer-reviewed papers" when I have decades of experience in a professional capacity? I can give any level of argument, explanation, or evidence you wish on my own.

If your understanding of the subject was such that you could find your own peer-reviewed papers on the topic, what were you asking for? You sounded like the idea of this being propaganda (a form of communication intentionally designed to create specific beliefs and/or reactions in a population) was new to you. I was trying to point you in the right direction. Since you seemed skeptical, I showed you that one of the most famous books ever written on the topic of numerical/statistical data presentation had an entire chapter dedicated to the intentional fuckery in this specific type of graph.

These graphs are designed to be divisive and obfuscatory. Our world works by intentional division and lying by half-truths. For example, the entire concept of "the left" and "the right" are purposeful contrivances to keep us divided; to show us an enemy, so we don't look at the real enemy; the man behind the curtain. This division is accomplished by media showing two different true stories, full of half-truths and a narrative overlay (lies of context and propaganda) on both sides. The real zinger is the narrative, "the other side is lying." Such statements of "the other side" are constant. At least once every 30 seconds on any news program you will hear a statement to that effect. The crazy thing is, they are all correct.

If you wish to know more about such topics, I can give you a metric fuckton of research, though perhaps you can just read my book when it comes out, which will hopefully be this week (at least the first half of Part 2).

Here is Part 1. It was written for a specific audience (Gamestop) and isn't (yet) about propaganda at all. It is rather a necessary first step to getting people to see a certain aspect of Reality that is otherwise completely hidden: The Matrix, which is the title of Part 2. A rewritten Part 1 will be included with Part 2 which takes out most of the GME specific stuff and gives a more compelling intro because my target audience is the whole world.

My work is on propaganda. My statements are on propaganda. I am writing a book on the real origin, nature, and effects of propaganda. I said that this was propaganda because I myself have plenty of experience with presenting data. I have personal knowledge of the subject. Why do I need to go look for "peer-reviewed papers" when I have decades of experience in a professional capacity? I can give any level of argument, explanation, or evidence you wish on my own.

If your understanding of the subject was such that you could find your own peer-reviewed papers on the topic, what were you asking for? You sounded like the idea of this being propaganda (a form of communication intentionally designed to create specific beliefs and/or reactions in a population) was new to you. I was trying to point you in the right direction. Since you seemed skeptical, I showed you that one of the most famous books ever written on the topic of numerical/statistical data presentation had an entire chapter dedicated to the intentional fuckery in this specific type of graph.

These graphs are designed to be divisive and obfuscatory. Our world works by intentional division and lying by half-truths. For example, the entire concept of "the left" and "the right" are purposeful contrivances to keep us divided; to show us an enemy, so we don't look at the real enemy; the man behind the curtain. This division is accomplished by media showing two different true stories, full of half-truths and a narrative overlay (lies of context and propaganda) on both sides. The real zinger is the narrative, "the other side is lying." Such statements of "the other side" are constant. At least once every 30 seconds on any news program you will hear a statement to that effect. The crazy thing is, they are all correct.

If you wish to know more about such topics, I can give you a metric fuckton of research, though perhaps you can just read my book when it comes out, which will hopefully be this week (at least the first half of Part 2).

Here is Part 1. It was written for a specific audience (Gamestop) and isn't (yet) about propaganda at all. It is rather a necessary first step to getting people to see a certain aspect of Reality that is otherwise completely hidden: The Matrix, which is the title of Part 2. A rewritten Part 1 will be included with Part 2 which takes out most of the GME specific stuff and gives a more compelling intro because my target audience is the whole world.

My work is on propaganda. My statements are on propaganda. I am writing a book on the real origin, nature, and effects of propaganda. I said that this was propaganda because I myself have plenty of experience with presenting data. I have personal knowledge of the subject. Why do I need to go look for "peer-reviewed papers" when I have decades of experience in a professional capacity? I can give any level of argument, explanation, or evidence you wish on my own.

If your understanding of the subject was such that you could find your own peer-reviewed papers on the topic, what were you asking for? You sounded like the idea of this being propaganda (a form of communication intentionally designed to create specific beliefs and/or reactions in a population) was new to you. I was trying to point you in the right direction.

These graphs are designed to be divisive and obfuscatory. Our world works by intentional division and lying by half-truths. For example, the entire concept of "the left" and "the right" are purposeful contrivances to keep us divided; to show us an enemy, so we don't look at the real enemy; the man behind the curtain. This division is accomplished by media showing two different true stories, full of half-truths and a narrative overlay (lies of context and propaganda) on both sides. The real zinger is the narrative, "the other side is lying." Such statements of "the other side" are constant. At least once every 30 seconds on any news program you will hear a statement to that effect. The crazy thing is, they are all correct.

If you wish to know more about such topics, I can give you a metric fuckton of research, though perhaps you can just read my book when it comes out, which will hopefully be this week (at least the first half of Part 2).

Here is Part 1. It was written for a specific audience (Gamestop) and isn't (yet) about propaganda at all. It is rather a necessary first step to getting people to see a certain aspect of Reality that is otherwise completely hidden: The Matrix, which is the title of Part 2. A rewritten Part 1 will be included with Part 2 which takes out most of the GME specific stuff and gives a more compelling intro because my target audience is the whole world.

My work is on propaganda. My statements are on propaganda. I am writing a book on the real origin, nature, and effects, of propaganda. I said that this was propaganda because I myself have plenty of experience with presenting data. I have personal knowledge of the subject. Why do I need to go look for "peer-reviewed papers" when I have decades of experience in a professional capacity? I can give any level of argument, explanation, or evidence you wish on my own.

If your understanding of the subject was such that you could find your own peer-reviewed papers on the topic, what were you asking for? You sounded like the idea of this being propaganda (a form of communication intentionally designed to create specific beliefs and/or reactions in a population) was new to you. I was trying to point you in the right direction.

These graphs are designed to be divisive and obfuscatory. Our world works by intentional division and lying by half-truths. For example, the entire concept of "the left" and "the right" are purposeful contrivances to keep us divided; to show us an enemy, so we don't look at the real enemy; the man behind the curtain. This division is accomplished by media showing two different true stories, full of half-truths and a narrative overlay (lies of context and propaganda) on both sides. The real zinger is the narrative, "the other side is lying." Such statements of "the other side" are constant. At least once every 30 seconds on any news program you will hear a statement to that effect. The crazy thing is, they are all correct.

If you wish to know more about such topics, I can give you a metric fuckton of research, though perhaps you can just read my book when it comes out, which will hopefully be this week (at least the first half of Part 2).

Here is Part 1. It was written for a specific audience (Gamestop) and isn't (yet) about propaganda at all. It is rather a necessary first step to getting people to see a certain aspect of Reality that is otherwise completely hidden: The Matrix, which is the title of Part 2. A rewritten Part 1 will be included with Part 2 which takes out most of the GME specific stuff and gives a more compelling intro because my target audience is the whole world.

My work is on propaganda. My statements are on propaganda. I am writing a book on the real origin, nature, and effects, of propaganda. I said that this was propaganda because I myself have plenty of experience with presenting data. I have personal knowledge of the subject. Why do I need to go look for "peer-reviewed papers" when I have decades of experience in a professional capacity?

If your understanding of the subject was such that you could find your own peer-reviewed papers on the topic, what the hell were you asking for? You sounded like the idea of this being propaganda (a form of communication intentionally designed to create specific beliefs and/or reactions in a population) was new to you. I was trying to point you in the right direction.

These graphs are designed to be divisive and obfuscatory. Our world works by intentional division and lying by half-truths. For example, the entire concept of "the left" and "the right" are purposeful contrivances to keep us divided; to show us an enemy, so we don't look at the real enemy; the man behind the curtain. This division is accomplished by media showing two different true stories, full of half-truths and a narrative overlay (lies of context and propaganda) on both sides. The real zinger is the narrative, "the other side is lying." Such statements of "the other side" are constant. At least once every 30 seconds on any news program you will hear a statement to that effect. The crazy thing is, they are all correct.

If you wish to know more about such topics, I can give you a metric fuckton of research, though perhaps you can just read my book when it comes out, which will hopefully be this week (at least the first half of Part 2).

Here is Part 1. It was written for a specific audience (Gamestop) and isn't (yet) about propaganda at all. It is rather a necessary first step to getting people to see a certain aspect of Reality that is otherwise completely hidden: The Matrix, which is the title of Part 2. A rewritten Part 1 will be included with Part 2 which takes out most of the GME specific stuff and gives a more compelling intro because my target audience is the whole world.

My work is on propaganda. My statements are on propaganda. I am writing a book on the real origin, nature, and effects, of propaganda. I said that this was propaganda because I myself have plenty of experience with presenting data. I have personal knowledge of the subject. Why do I need to go look for "peer-reviewed papers" when I have decades of experience in a professional capacity?

If your understanding of the subject was such that you could find your own peer-reviewed papers on the topic, what the hell were you asking for? You sounded like the idea of this being propaganda (a form of communication intentionally designed to create specific beliefs and/or reactions in a population) was new to you. I was trying to point you in the right direction.

These graphs are designed to be divisive and obfuscatory. Our world works by intentional division and lying by half-truths. For example, the entire concept of "the left" and "the right" are purposeful contrivances to keep us divided; to show us an enemy, so we don't look at the real enemy; the man behind the curtain. This division is accomplished by media showing two different true stories, full of half-truths and a narrative overlay (lies of context and propaganda) on both sides. The real zinger is the narrative, "the other side is lying." Such statements of "the other side" are constant. At least once every 30 seconds on any news program you will hear a statement to that effect. The crazy thing is, they are all correct.

If you wish to know more about such topics, I can give you a metric fuckton of research, though perhaps you can just read my book when it comes out, which will hopefully be this week (at least the first half of Part 2).

Here is Part 1. It was written for a specific audience (Gamestop) and isn't (yet) about propaganda at all. It is rather a necessary first step to getting people to see a certain aspect of Reality that is otherwise completely hidden: The Matrix, which is the title of Part 2. A rewritten Part 1 will be included with Part 2 which takes out most of the GME specific stuff because my target audience is... the whole world.

My work is on propaganda. My statements are on propaganda. I am writing a book on the real origin, nature, and effects, of propaganda. I said that this was propaganda because I myself have plenty of experience with presenting data. I have personal knowledge of the subject. Why do I need to go look for "peer-reviewed papers" when I have decades of experience in a professional capacity?

If your understanding of the subject was such that you could find your own peer-reviewed papers on the topic, what the hell were you asking for? You sounded like the idea of this being propaganda (a form of communication intentionally designed to create specific beliefs and/or reactions in a population) was new to you. I was trying to point you in the right direction.

These graphs are designed to be divisive and obfuscatory. Our world works by intentional division and lying by half-truths. For example, the entire concept of "the left" and "the right" are purposeful contrivances to keep us divided; to show us an enemy, so we don't look at the real enemy; the man behind the curtain. This division is accomplished by media showing two different true stories, full of half-truths and a narrative overlay (lies of context and propaganda) on both sides. The real zinger is the constant narrative, "the other side is lying." Such statements of "the other side" are constant. At least once every 30 seconds on any news program you will hear a statement to that effect. The crazy thing is, they are all correct.

If you wish to know more about such topics, I can give you a metric fuckton of research, though perhaps you can just read my book when it comes out, which will hopefully be this week (at least the first half of Part 2).

Here is Part 1. It was written for a specific audience (Gamestop) and isn't (yet) about propaganda at all. It is rather a necessary first step to getting people to see a certain aspect of Reality that is otherwise completely hidden: The Matrix, which is the title of Part 2. A rewritten Part 1 will be included with Part 2 which takes out most of the GME specific stuff because my target audience is... the whole world.

My work is on propaganda. My statements are on propaganda. I am writing a book on the real origin, nature, and effects, of propaganda. I said that this was propaganda because I myself have plenty of experience with presenting data. I have personal knowledge of the subject. Why do I need to go look for "peer-reviewed papers" when I have decades of experience in a professional capacity?

If your understanding of the subject was such that you could find your own peer-reviewed papers on the topic, what the hell were you asking for? You sounded like the idea of this being propaganda (a form of communication intentionally designed to create specific beliefs and/or reactions in a population) was new to you. I was trying to point you in the right direction.

These graphs are designed to be divisive and obfuscatory. Our world works by intentional division and lying by half-truths. For example, the entire concept of "the left" and "the right" are purposeful contrivances to keep us divided; to show us an enemy, so we don't look at the real enemy; the man behind the curtain.

If you wish to know more about such topics, I can give you a metric fuckton of research, though perhaps you can just read my book when it comes out, which will hopefully be this week (at least the first half of Part 2).

Here is Part 1. It was written for a specific audience (Gamestop) and isn't (yet) about propaganda at all. It is rather a necessary first step to getting people to see a certain aspect of Reality that is otherwise completely hidden: The Matrix, which is the title of Part 2. A rewritten Part 1 will be included with Part 2 which takes out most of the GME specific stuff because my target audience is... the whole world.

My work is on propaganda. My statements are on propaganda. I am writing a book on the real origin, nature, and effects, of propaganda. I said that this was propaganda because I myself have plenty of experience with presenting data. I have personal knowledge of the subject. Why do I need to go look for "peer-reviewed papers" when I have decades of experience in a professional capacity?

If your understanding of the subject was such that you could find your own peer-reviewed papers on the topic, what the hell were you asking for? You sounded like the idea of this being propaganda (a form of communication intentionally designed to create specific beliefs and/or reactions in a population) was new to you. I was trying to point you in the right direction.

These graphs are designed to be divisive and obfuscatory. Our world works by intentional division and lying by half-truths. For example, the entire concept of "the left" and "the right" are purposeful contrivances to keep us divided; to show us an enemy, so we don't look at the real enemy; the man behind the curtain.

If you wish to know more about such topics, I can give you a metric fuckton of research, though perhaps you can just read my book when it comes out, which will hopefully be this week (at least the first half of Part 2).

Here is Part 1. It was written for a specific audience (Gamestop) and isn't (yet) about propaganda at all. It is rather a necessary first step to getting people to see a certain aspect of Reality that is otherwise completely hidden: The Matrix, which is the title of Part 2. A rewritten Part 1 will be included with Part 2 which takes out most of the GME specific stuff.

My work is on propaganda. My statements are on propaganda. I am writing a book on the real nature, and effects, of propaganda. I said that this was propaganda because I myself have plenty of experience with presenting data. I have personal knowledge of the subject. Why do I need to go look for "peer-reviewed papers" when I have decades of experience in a professional capacity?

If your understanding of the subject was such that you could find your own peer-reviewed papers on the topic, what the hell were you asking for? You sounded like the idea of this being propaganda (a form of communication intentionally designed to create specific beliefs and/or reactions in a population) was new to you. I was trying to point you in the right direction.

These graphs are designed to be divisive and obfuscatory. Our world works by intentional division and lying by half-truths. For example, the entire concept of "the left" and "the right" are purposeful contrivances to keep us divided; to show us an enemy, so we don't look at the real enemy; the man behind the curtain.

If you wish to know more about such topics, I can give you a metric fuckton of research, though perhaps you can just read my book when it comes out, which will hopefully be this week (at least the first half of Part 2).

Here is Part 1. It was written for a specific audience (Gamestop) and isn't (yet) about propaganda at all. It is rather a necessary first step to getting people to see a certain aspect of Reality that is otherwise completely hidden: The Matrix, which is the title of Part 2. A rewritten Part 1 will be included with Part 2 which takes out most of the GME specific stuff.