From: frankred@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Martin Redington)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: TELEVISION: The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Enslavement
Date: 30 Aug 92 20:16:46 GMT
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK

In article <1992Aug30.092720.5841@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> aq817@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steve Crocker) writes:
>
>In response to John DiNardo's insightful criticism of TV brainwashing,
>I am reposting here parts one and two of a series on the same subject
>from LaRouche's papre, The New Federalist. These were originally posted
>on alt.activism by John Covici,
>
>Article #31668 (31686 is last):
>From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
>Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
>>Newsgroups: alt.activism
>Subject: Turn Off Your Television!!
>Date: Sat Aug  1 12:29:28 1992
>
>
>by L. Wolfe 
>
>Hey buddy, I'm
>talking to you. Yes, you, the guy
>sitting in front of the television.
>Turn down the sound a bit, so that you
>can hear what I am saying. 

I whole heartedly agree with many of 
the comments in this post, however,
the following section is utter
bollocks.

>   One of the oligarchy's
>institutions for manipulation of
>populations is located in a suburb of
>London called Tavistock. 

minor quibble; the Tavistock institute, as
you would well know, had you been there, is
located near Tavistock Square, in the very
heart of London. There is no `suburb' or
area of London called Tavistock. The area
around Tavistock Square is essentially
Bloomsbury.

>The Tavistock
>Institute for Human Relations, which
>also has a branch in Sussex, England, is
>the ``mother'' for much of this
>extended network, of which Becker is a
>member. They are the specialists in
>{both} hard and soft
>brainwashing. 

What extended network? Any other 
members? What do you mean by specialists?
I seriously doubt the TI`s. staff have
any direct influence whatsoever on
TV programming. As far as I am aware
it is a research institute, whose
work is published in international
journals, and is freely available.
For the bunch of heinious manipulators, 
you paint them to be, these people have 
been surprisingly forthcoming with
their findings.


>   The Tavistock Institute is the
>psychological warfare arm of the
>British Royal household. 

sheer and utter tripe. The Royal family,
as recently demonstrated by the 'Dianagate'
fiasco, is utterly incapable of 
dealing with the media. The Edward
and Mrs Windsor affair, which was not
reported in the UK at the time, out of 
deference to the royals would be spread
all over the tabloids in no time wahtsoever
nowadays. The British royals are at the 
mercy of British public opinion, and it is 
their great good fortune that the British 
public generally views them (or most of 
them) in a positive light.

The likelihood of the Royal Household
having a `psychological warfare arm' is
comparable to that of Disney possessing
an in-house SWAT team.

The oligarchs
>behind Tavistock, and similar outfits
>in the United States and elsewhere, are
>determined that you should be a
>television addict, sucking up a daily
>dose of brainwashing from the ``tube;''
>that is how they control you. 

However, I would agree that there are
some very shadowy and disreputable
individuals controlling the mass
media. The British tabloid press's
blatant support of the Tory party 
during the general election spring to 
mind. British TV is generally of a high
standard, but recently there have been
disturbing trends towards a distinctly
partisan view of some stories. On some 
subjects (e.g. the Falklands, the Gulf
War) this has always been the case.
The issue is to what extent such bias 
reflects `the mood of the country', or 
shapes it.

>   Another Tavistock brainwasher,
>Fred Emery, who studied television for
>25 years, confirms this.

He's very helpful, this Emery bloke,
considering he's behind such mass
media manipulation. 


>   As Emery explains: {``We are
>proposing that television as a simple
>constant and repetitive and ambiguous
>visual stimulus, gradually closes down
>the central nervous system of
>man.''} 
>   Becker holds a similar view of the
>effect of television on American's
>ability to think: {``Americans
>don't really think--they have opinions
>and feelings. Television creates the
>opinion and then validates it.''} 

ditto

>   Democratic presidential candidate
>Lyndon LaRouche has said that America
>needs a year of ``cold turkey'' from
>television if we are to survive as a
>nation.

what an excellent idea. I don't have a TV,
and I can't say I miss it.

As I said, I agree with most of this article.
I would not be at all surprised to discover that
certain groups or individuals manipulate the media
to their own advantage. The real question is
`who' and `how much'. But the Tavistock people seem like
the good guys in all this - they're telling you
about it after all. The Royal family is about
as much threat to your freedom of mind as a wet
fish. Attacking them only damages your argument

            cheers,
                     Martin.

Disclaimer: I have no connection whatsoever with
the Royal Family, or the Tavistock Institute. I was
a Psychology student at University College London
88-91, and I believe that UCL and TI are somehow
affiliated. However, to the best of my knowledge,
at no time did I study at, work for, or otherwise
come into contact with the Tavistock Institute.