The IPS Institute for Advanced Media Deconstruction

Autohoaxology 101 Lecture 1 (notes)

The IPS Institute for Advanced Media Deconstruction

Autohoaxology 101 Lecture 1 (notes)

MSM, MSM+, and MSM-

The three primary ways people interpret the mainstream media (the MSM):

1. The mainstream non-conspiratorial view, or MSM.

2. The conspiratorial view, adding up the existing narrative, or MSM+

3. The autohoaxing view, questioning the premise set by the MSM and removing unverifiable claims, or MSM-

THE MSM VIEW

Most people trust their sources of news. Their assumption is that if something is fake, it will be exposed by the media, assuming it has its own self-correcting mechanisms. This assumes the media is indeed reporting news and not constructing narratives.

The mainstream media provides a glut of news every day and therefore leaves most people at the mercy of their news providers to curate relevant information. Since most are left to outsource their intelligence gathering there is a disparity between known facts and accepted beliefs. 

KNOWERS AND BELIEVERS

Known facts are reality tested and verified whereas accepted beliefs are the second-hand, hearsay, or "common wisdom" kinds of facts. Someone that "knows someone who knows somebody that is related to a person" connected to a story doesn't count as a source. Most mainstream media is technically hearsay.

Since it's not possible for most to vet every news item, media consumers have been rendered into believers more than knowers. MSM true believers constitute the majority.

THE MSM + VIEW

Conspiracy theorists generally assume the mainstream media to be telling the truth about the death toll or the event itself, but they assume the shooter was a “patsy” or a “mind-controlled assassin.” Their additional claims constitute the “+”, the additional variables. Conspiracy theorists, too,  are in the category of believers more than knowers. 

MSM and MSM+ are in fact the dominant narrative and the counter-narrative. Both operate within the parameters of the world stage as defined by the MSM. Both accept televised news as an authority. 

My contention here is that MSM and MSM+ offer two versions of the same lies.

SIMULATED OR STIMULATED?

Conspiracy theorists believe the government is causing things and the media reports them, for example, school shootings. They call these “false flags.” This implies real events stimulated by a hidden hand. For example, conspiracy theorists say the January 6th, 2021 riots were "stimulated" or "provoked" by FBI agents.

In this view, what we saw on television was real, but the MSM isn't telling the entire story, therefore the MSM + explanation. The trouble is, this assumes the media itself is an observer reporting real events. This both exonerates the media and conceals their actual role as world-view fabricators conducting perception management operations.

THE MSM- VIEW

The MSM- view deconstructs the news and recognizes the psychological operations inherent in its dominant narratives. It takes the logical position that the burden of proof is on the reporters to establish the veracity of their claims, and storytellers, not the audience.

The operating premise could be described as “fake until proven real," which shouldn't be difficult when reporting ordinary events. Extraordinary events may require extraordinary proof.

THE FAKEABILTY QUESTION

The question of fakeability is a crucial starting point, both for media analysis and as a debate starting point with MSM believers. Is it within the realm of fakeability? Here are some basic questions to determine this:

Could such an event be faked in the movies?

Could the event be reproduced using known technology?

If fakeable, is there a discernable motive or agenda behind the story?

This question raises points that mainstream news consumers may have missed. For example, they may not know that simulated terror attacks can be readily faked with enough actors, special effects, and collaboration with governments. If people don't know what applications blue-screen technology has in modern information warfare then they would have no idea when it's being used against them. Visual lies can be detected just as verbally communicated lies. Simulated news events are often betrayed by the amateur delivery of the actors, but can easily be detected in by the special effect glitches.

ELUCIDATION VS OBFUSCATION