Jump to content


Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Pcychology psyops propaganda techniques disinformation

60 replies to this topic

#21 status - 6

status - 6
  • Guests

Posted 28 September 2015 - 09:58 AM

Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.

  • 0

#22 status - 7

status - 7
  • Guests

Posted 28 September 2015 - 10:01 AM

Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

  • 0

#23 status - 8

status - 8
  • Guests

Posted 28 September 2015 - 10:15 AM

Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

  • 0

#24 status - 9

status - 9
  • Guests

Posted 28 September 2015 - 10:28 AM

Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.


Want to watch this again later?




  • 0

#25 status - 10

status - 10
  • Guests

Posted 28 September 2015 - 10:49 AM

Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.







  • 0

#26 status - 11

status - 11
  • Guests

Posted 28 September 2015 - 10:54 AM

Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

  • 0

#27 status - 12

status - 12
  • Guests

Posted 28 September 2015 - 10:59 AM

Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

  • 0

#28 status - 13

status - 13
  • Guests

Posted 28 September 2015 - 11:05 AM

Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.

  • 0

#29 status - 14

status - 14
  • Guests

Posted 28 September 2015 - 11:11 AM

Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.

  • 0

#30 status - 15

status - 15
  • Guests

Posted 28 September 2015 - 11:17 AM

Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

  • 0

Reply to this topic


Similar Topics Collapse

IPB Skin By Virteq