'Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy' author John le Carré has died at 89

Why would they possibly gather these musicians in one community? To do what? What do you believe anyone gained? Do you believe that the musicians knew about this?

I dated a girl in college whose Mom lived in Laurel Canyon around this time, and she would have laughed at this book. People like Jim Morrison barely spent anytime there at all.

Heroin is a dangerous depressant and took down many musicians. No need for a big conspiracy. The human mind looks for connections and narratives to explain events, which makes it easy to sell conspiracies.

Please explain why any agency would gather musicians into one area? Please share some evidence from your research.
I do not have to answer any of those questions as I did not make those claims. I do know however about how the music industry works and how long it takes to break a band. So I am not going to be naïve enough to just believe Summer of Love suddenly happened out of nowhere in 1966. It just doesn't work that way. There is another band from the 80s with a Laurel Canyon connection that got signed on in no time and mysteriously got Donington Park dates even when their album did not perform well for a full year after their release. At the same time, other bands had to deliver at least two to three commercially successful albums to start enjoying the label support they got. The band had a guitarist with name starting with an S, no prizes for guessing which one.

I don't know why they were put in there and what the CIA wanted out of them. But I am not going to rule out the possibility of clandestine operations. That is not a conspiracy theory, that is just being skeptical and not believing whatever the mainstream media wants you to believe. Just the same as I don't believe Anderson Cooper's CIA background is completely irrelevant and that he is a completely innocent operator.
 
Good to see the free press in bed with the President and secret service covert ops rather that doing what ideology tells us they do; namely, hold political leaders to account!

Makes the Soviet Union with its Pravda and umbrellas look a bit too obvious.

Being an openly acknowledged intern at CIA would make Cooper a bad candidate for being a CIA asset. He received no training in his internship, and you are just engaging in random speculation based on the internship.

Here is something more plausible:

Murdoch, Scaife and CIA Propaganda
December 31, 2014

Special Report: The rapid expansion of America’s right-wing media began in the 1980s as the Reagan administration coordinated foreign policy initiatives with conservative media executives, including Rupert Murdoch, and then cleared away regulatory hurdles, reports Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry

The Reagan administration pulled right-wing media executives Rupert Murdoch and Richard Mellon Scaife into a CIA-organized “perception management” operation which aimed Cold War-style propaganda at the American people in the 1980s, according to declassified U.S. government records.

President Reagan meets with publisher Rupert Murdoch, U.S. Information Agency Director Charles Wick, lawyer Roy Cohn and his law partner Thomas Bolan in the Oval Office on Jan. 18, 1983. (Photo credit: Reagan presidential library)

Although some records relating to Murdoch remain classified, several documents that have been released indicate that he and billionaire Scaife were considered sources of financial and other support for President Ronald Reagan’s hard-line Central American policies, including the CIA’s covert war in Nicaragua.
A driving force behind creation of Reagan’s extraordinary propaganda bureaucracy was CIA Director William Casey who dispatched one of the CIA’s top covert action specialists, Walter Raymond Jr., to the National Security Council to oversee the project. According to the documents, Murdoch was brought into the operation in 1983 when he was still an Australian citizen and his media empire was much smaller than it is today.

Charles Wick, director of the U.S. Information Agency, arranged at least two face-to-face meetings between Murdoch and Reagan, the first on Jan. 18, 1983, when the administration was lining up private financing for its propaganda campaign, according to records at the Reagan presidential library in Simi Valley, California. That meeting also included lawyer and political operative Roy Cohn and his law partner Thomas Bolan.

The Oval Office meeting between Reagan and Murdoch came just five days after NSC Advisor William Clark noted in a Jan. 13, 1983 memo to Reagan the need for non-governmental money to advance the project. “We will develop a scenario for obtaining private funding,” Clark wrote, as cited in an unpublished draft chapter of the congressional Iran-Contra investigation.

Clark then told the President that “Charlie Wick has offered to take the lead. We may have to call on you to meet with a group of potential donors.”

The documents suggest that Murdoch was soon viewed as a source for that funding. In an Aug. 9, 1983 memo summing up the results of a Casey-organized meeting with five leading ad executives regarding how to “sell” Reagan’s aggressive policies in Central America, Raymond referred to Murdoch as if he already were helping out.
https://consortiumnews.com/2014/12/31/murdoch-scaife-and-cia-propaganda/
 
Last edited:
You claim to have met so many people and further claim on the basis of uncheckable knowldege that you know something.

So a girl's mother is the source of your claims? It doesn't sound like a great foundation for knocking down a conspiracy theory.

Why would they possibly gather these musicians in one community? To do what? What do you believe anyone gained? Do you believe that the musicians knew about this?

I dated a girl in college whose Mom lived in Laurel Canyon around this time, and she would have laughed at this book. People like Jim Morrison barely spent anytime there at all.

Heroin is a dangerous depressant and took down many musicians. No need for a big conspiracy. The human mind looks for connections and narratives to explain events, which makes it easy to sell conspiracies.

Please explain why any agency would gather musicians into one area? Please share some evidence from your research.
 
You claim to have met so many people and further claim on the basis of uncheckable knowldege that you know something.

So a girl's mother is the source of your claims? It doesn't sound like a great foundation for knocking down a conspiracy theory.
Don't distort my words, you disingenuous provocateur. I mentioned her because she popped into my mind when I posted about the ridiculous book, not as evidence. Do you understand how absurd the author's claim is? He is essentially claiming that Laurel Canyon was full of "Manchurian Candidate" singers and musicians raised by military officers who were secrete intelligence agents. According to the author, CIA magically planted these sleeping agents together in Laurel Canyon near a military base as part of a plot to unleash their music on the American public.

If you want to believe that, dear ol' Bart, go ahead. Personally, I get annoyed when charlatans peddle insane theories, and people fall for them because they don't trust the "mainstream" media (or science). Maybe you and Dolgopolov should have the same skepticism for conspiracy theories as you do for everything else.

You might consider applying Occam's razor when analyzing things. Analyze evidence and come up with the most logical conclusion instead of pulling some bizarre narrative out of your arse and trying to fit disparate evidence into the narrative because you feel like believing it.

I am on this forum for a fun diversion. Everything I posted in this thread is an honest assessment based on what I have heard or read. You, Bart, have become like an annoying little dog barking at my ankles. People can interpret my posts anyway they want. I really don't care.
 
I didn't distort your words and I did not defend the book. When you argue you sometimes manufacture a personal connection in order to assert from authority the truth of what you are arguing.

Occam's razor also has no real applicability in the historical sciences. In history you are not seeking logical conclusions. You are seeking to create a narrative based on, mostly, documents.

No amount of personal abuse by you is going to make your arguments more convincing so I suggest you refrain from it in any future 'honest assessment'.

Don't distort my words, you disingenuous provocateur. I mentioned her because she popped into my mind when I posted about the ridiculous book, not as evidence.

You might consider applying Occam's razor when analyzing things. Analyze evidence and come up with the most logical conclusion instead of pulling some bizarre narrative out of your arse and trying to fit disparate evidence into the narrative because you feel like believing it.

I am on this forum for a fun diversion. Everything I posted in this thread is an honest assessment based on what I have heard or read. You, Bart, have become like an annoying little dog barking at my ankles. People can interpret my posts anyway they want. I really don't care.
 
Last edited:
You might consider applying Occam's razor when analyzing things. Analyze evidence and come up with the most logical conclusion instead of pulling some bizarre narrative out of your arse and trying to fit disparate evidence into the narrative because you feel like believing it.

You mean the process by which NYT and CNN told us the Iraq War was needed? Or justified the invasion of Libya again for Obama? Sorry but why should Occam's Razor be applied to anything the US establishment says?

PS: I didn't offer any theories one way or the other. People can read and quote back the words to me if they think I am wrong. I only speculated one way or the other. I find it interesting that merely my voicing skepticism ruffles your feathers so much.
 
Last edited:
Russia hasn’t just hacked our computer systems. It’s hacked our minds.
Opinion by
Fareed Zakaria
Dec. 17, 2020


Vladimir Putin’s Russia has significantly expanded its hybrid warfare, using new methods to spread chaos among its adversaries. The United States will have to fortify its digital infrastructure and respond more robustly to the Kremlin’s mounting cyberattacks. But what about the perhaps more insidious Russian efforts at disinformation, which have helped to reshape the information environment worldwide?

In 2016, two scholars at Rand Corp. wrote a paper describing Russia’s “firehose of falsehood” propaganda model. Very different from Cold War-era propaganda, current Russian approaches work with prevailing technologies and social media platforms. There are two key features — “high numbers of channels and messages and a shameless willingness to disseminate partial truths or outright fictions.” There is no effort at consistency or credibility. The report quotes one analyst: “New Russian propaganda entertains, confuses and overwhelms the audience.”

Russia’s method closely resembles Trump’s own propaganda strategy. Trump issues a blizzard of messages, using every medium he can find. He is usually untruthful but always entertaining. He never worries about consistency, asking only that you remember his most recent claims. When campaigning in 2016 he argued that the unemployment rate was a hoax, that the Federal Reserve was keeping interest rates dangerously low and that the stock market was a bubble about to burst. Once he entered the White House, he soon said the opposite about all three. If you bombard people in the present, few have time to dwell on the past.

Wittingly or unwittingly, Trump uses the Russian model, which rests on the principle that people get convinced when they hear the same message many times from a variety of sources, no matter how biased. He adds to this an intuitive understanding of how social media works. If you make a claim that is truly outrageous, it will attract attention and eyeballs, spread far and wide, and ensure that people hear it repeatedly — and over time begin to believe it. A boring truth dies on Twitter, while a sensational lie goes viral and (most disturbingly) over time become a half-truth. (I recently experienced this myself. A commentary of mine was edited so that I seemed to be saying close to the opposite of what I actually was, which then ensured that it was widely disseminated.)

Americans seem even more susceptible to theories that confirm their partisan beliefs. The most startling fact about 2020 is not that Trump tried to overturn the results of the election. Many of us predicted he would try. What is stunning is that, according to the polls, 60 million Americans believe his assertions and the series of lies that sustain them. The problem is not just that Russia has hacked America’s computer systems. It seems to have hacked our minds.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...dd72a8-40a7-11eb-8bc0-ae155bee4aff_story.html
 
I've seen no evidence of Russian minds walking around town at the moment. Could you tell me what to look for?

Russia hasn’t just hacked our computer systems. It’s hacked our minds.
Opinion by
Fareed Zakaria
Dec. 17, 2020


Vladimir Putin’s Russia has significantly expanded its hybrid warfare, using new methods to spread chaos among its adversaries. The United States will have to fortify its digital infrastructure and respond more robustly to the Kremlin’s mounting cyberattacks. But what about the perhaps more insidious Russian efforts at disinformation, which have helped to reshape the information environment worldwide?

In 2016, two scholars at Rand Corp. wrote a paper describing Russia’s “firehose of falsehood” propaganda model. Very different from Cold War-era propaganda, current Russian approaches work with prevailing technologies and social media platforms. There are two key features — “high numbers of channels and messages and a shameless willingness to disseminate partial truths or outright fictions.” There is no effort at consistency or credibility. The report quotes one analyst: “New Russian propaganda entertains, confuses and overwhelms the audience.”

Russia’s method closely resembles Trump’s own propaganda strategy. Trump issues a blizzard of messages, using every medium he can find. He is usually untruthful but always entertaining. He never worries about consistency, asking only that you remember his most recent claims. When campaigning in 2016 he argued that the unemployment rate was a hoax, that the Federal Reserve was keeping interest rates dangerously low and that the stock market was a bubble about to burst. Once he entered the White House, he soon said the opposite about all three. If you bombard people in the present, few have time to dwell on the past.

Wittingly or unwittingly, Trump uses the Russian model, which rests on the principle that people get convinced when they hear the same message many times from a variety of sources, no matter how biased. He adds to this an intuitive understanding of how social media works. If you make a claim that is truly outrageous, it will attract attention and eyeballs, spread far and wide, and ensure that people hear it repeatedly — and over time begin to believe it. A boring truth dies on Twitter, while a sensational lie goes viral and (most disturbingly) over time become a half-truth. (I recently experienced this myself. A commentary of mine was edited so that I seemed to be saying close to the opposite of what I actually was, which then ensured that it was widely disseminated.)

Americans seem even more susceptible to theories that confirm their partisan beliefs. The most startling fact about 2020 is not that Trump tried to overturn the results of the election. Many of us predicted he would try. What is stunning is that, according to the polls, 60 million Americans believe his assertions and the series of lies that sustain them. The problem is not just that Russia has hacked America’s computer systems. It seems to have hacked our minds.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...dd72a8-40a7-11eb-8bc0-ae155bee4aff_story.html
 
I've seen no evidence of Russian minds walking around town at the moment. Could you tell me what to look for?
Look for the contemporary Russian model, which is popular with many, including European and American purveyors of extremist right-wing populism.
the-russian-firehose-of-falsehood-propaganda-model-rand-2-638.jpg


Here are some Russian models for you to look out for:

Natalia Vodianova
natalia-vodianova.jpg


Anne Vyalitsyna
Anne-Vyalitsyna.jpg


Sasha Luss
2019+Harper+s+Bazaar+ICONS+Xs6fFKWfj9ex.jpg
 
The Israelis and Saudis just did a joint hack on Al Jazeera, but that was not on the front page as "friends" can hack and meddle all they like, as we do.

And this attempt, not unique to you, to make American extremist populism some sort of derivative of Putin's Russia is completely and utterly fanciful.

America has a long and strong tradition of extremist populism, and even Theodor W. Adorno studied it in the forties, so blaming outsiders avoids the issue.

Look for the contemporary Russian model, which is popular with many, including European and American purveyors of extremist right-wing populism.


Here are some Russian models for you to look out for:
 
And this attempt, not unique to you, to make American extremist populism some sort of derivative of Putin's Russia is completely and utterly fanciful.

America has a long and strong tradition of extremist populism, and even Theodor W. Adorno studied it in the forties, so blaming outsiders avoids the issue.

Next up, Stephen King is declared a dangerous Russian asset because he wrote Dead Zone in 1979.
 
Look for the contemporary Russian model, which is popular with many, including European and American purveyors of extremist right-wing populism.
the-russian-firehose-of-falsehood-propaganda-model-rand-2-638.jpg


Here are some Russian models for you to look out for:

Natalia Vodianova
natalia-vodianova.jpg


Anne Vyalitsyna
Anne-Vyalitsyna.jpg


Sasha Luss
2019+Harper+s+Bazaar+ICONS+Xs6fFKWfj9ex.jpg
If Sasha had told me to vote for Drumpf I would have...twice!
 
I've seen no evidence of Russian minds walking around town at the moment. Could you tell me what to look for?
Chinese, American, and Russian intelligence services all engage in espionage and propaganda. China has traditionally focused on military and economic espionage, and not engaged in internal politics with disruptive tactics in the U.S., believing that the relationship was working for them and they didn't want to anger one party. Russia's intelligence services are trying to undermine U.S. and European nations and institutions.

Yes, the far-right movements in the U.S. and Europe are the result of internal dissatisfaction, and not Russian creations. The Russian strategy is to find divisions and weaknesses and catalyze them with propaganda.

Putin was traumatized as a KGB officer when his consulate in East Germany was threatened by a crowd during the break-up of the Soviet Union. Revenge is a powerful motive, which often leads people to act against their self-interest, and Putin hasn't forgotten. Also, Russia's oligarchy and autocratic government want to discredit the freer and more prosperous (for more people) European and U.S. democracies.

The Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation (SVR)

............................................................
SVR-Russia.png

Satellite photos indicate a significant expansion at the headquarters of Russia's international espionage service at Yasenevo, Moscow, Russia,
(55.584 N, 37.517 E):
Слу́жба вне́шней разве́дки, tr. Sluzhba vneshney razvedki
Foreign Intelligence Service
of the Russian Federation
райо́н Я́сенево
Yasenevo District


“If everybody always lies to you, the consequence is not that you believe the lies, but rather that nobody believes anything any longer... And with such a people you can then do what you please.”
 
Last edited:
My understanding is that during the Cold War, CIA and KGB went through great effort to make disinformation propaganda look credible, planting plausible stories in seemingly credible media sources, and backing the story with manufactured credible-seeming evidence. Russian intelligence is exploiting a weakness in how human minds process information.

Illusory Truth, Lies, and Political Propaganda:
Posted Jan 23, 2020

According to a Vox interview by Sean Illing with Peter Pomerantsev, a Soviet-born journalist and author of This Is Not Propaganda: Adventures in the War Against Reality, a noticeable shift in the Soviet propaganda strategy emerged in post-Soviet Russia that focused not so much on presenting falsehoods per se as breeding disbelief in facts for its own sake:

“20th century Soviet politicians lied a hell of a lot, but they always made their lies sound very respectable, as if they were the truth… [In Russia today, it’s] not about proving something, it’s about casting doubt. Putin isn’t selling a wonderful communist future. He’s saying, we live in a dark world, the truth is unknowable, the truth is always subjective, you never know what it is, and you, the little guy, will never be able to make sense of it all – so you need to follow a strong leader.”

Which brings us, of course, to the striking similarity of Russia’s propaganda machine to the exploitation of the illusory truth effect in US politics today. As Illing points out:
“…we’re experiencing a brand of reality-bending politics that really began in post-Soviet Russia. It’s a politics built on a distinctive form of propaganda, the goal of which is to confuse, not convince.”

Pomerantsev describes how he has witnessed Russian propaganda strategies spread across the globe over the past decade:
“What was different about these new Russian politicians is that they just didn’t play this factuality game at all. They didn’t care about facts and didn’t pretend to care. So you couldn’t really call out their lies because they were never playing that game. And this is exactly what you see Trump doing right now.
…it’s spread from Russia across the world… The same kind of politics I saw in Russia years ago is the same kind of politics I’m seeing now in the UK and Brazil and the Philippines and the US.”

Whether or not the authors are aware of it, this passage perfectly illustrates the illusory truth effect. President Trump tends to employ short phrases of uncertain attribution (“A lot of people are saying…”) that contradict facts, repeating them ad infinitum (e.g. “Stable genius!” “Rigged!” “No collusion, no obstruction!” “Fake news!” “Witchhunt!” "Read the transcripts!") until even those who identify with the opposing political party who know statements are lies might come to believe them on some level. Although President Trump has been ridiculed for speaking at a fourth-grade reading level and relying on Twitter to communicate not only to the American public but foreign entities, it may be that his vocabulary, syntax, and preferred communication medium are intentional if not taken directly from a page in the Russian propaganda playbook.

With former Trump campaign manager Steve Bannon calling for the “destruction of the administrative state,” eroding the very concept of truth seems to be part of a larger effort designed to tear down the authority of previously respected institutions or, as journalist Jesse Singal put it, to “undermine order itself.”

Although the erosion of truth and the rejection of expertise is often a core component of populist movements, Arendt and scholars of her work have highlighted that the path from populism to authoritarianism, totalitarianism, and fascism can be short, direct, and downhill (see here and here for accounts of how this has happened in recent history around the world). Whether that goal is Bannon’s, Trump’s, or Putin’s and how they are connected remains unclear. What is clear is the threat that goal poses to “truth, justice, and the American way.”

Researchers at RAND are pessimistic about “traditional counterpropaganda efforts,” noting that we shouldn’t “expect to counter the firehose of falsehood with the squirt gun of truth.”9 Indeed, recent evidence suggests that there are several barriers to countering misinformation. One is that successfully correcting misinformation may require more cognitive ability than many voters have, regardless of political affiliation.11 Another is that the illusory truth effect seems to include not only faulty perceptions of truth, but also a diminished sense that repeating disinformation is unethical12 such that we risk becoming inured to the pervasiveness of lying, with liars in turn no longer bothering to deny that they’ve lied.

The internet also represents a major obstacle to countering the illusory truth effect. While the internet’s unprecedented democratization of knowledge has fueled populist movements across the world, the hope that truth would “rise to the top” has not been realized. On the contrary, research has shown that online disinformation spreads “farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly” than the truth.13 Together with the illusory truth effect, the internet has allowed authoritarian political movements to spread rampant disinformation and erode trust in not only the “fake news” media but the concept of truth altogether by delegitimizing objective reality.

Still, recent research provides us with some pointers on how we might stem the noxious impact of disinformation. In one recent experiment, encouraging young people to act like “fact checkers” mitigated the illusory truth effect.14 Similar studies have shown that “inoculation strategies” warning people about likely exposure to misinformation and beating misinformation to the punch, can reduce susceptibility to being taken in by disinformation.15 Based on such findings, RAND researchers suggest that forewarning people about how propagandists exploit the illusory truth effect to manipulate audiences is likely to be more effective than specific refutations.9 And so…

The illusory truth effect is real.

It is commonly exploited as a tool of political propaganda.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...ry-truth-lies-and-political-propaganda-part-2
 
The awful truth about post-Soviet propaganda is that they have tried to copy the BBC model. The formula is a superficial veneer of impartiality masking a deep-rooted bias toward the establishment.

All you have to do in order to "lie" is to simply edit out what you don't want your audience to hear. The BBC, for example, had a reporter at the Assange trial but barely reported anything due to 'editorial considerations'.

Meanwhile, of course, the BBC turns every Hong Kong demonstration leader into a 'hero of freedom' complete with extensive biographies and reporting on every twist and turn in their fate.

My understanding is that during the Cold War, CIA and KGB went through great effort to make disinformation propaganda look credible, planting plausible stories in seemingly credible media sources, and backing the story with manufactured credible-seeming evidence. Russian intelligence is exploiting a weakness in how human minds process information.

Illusory Truth, Lies, and Political Propaganda:
Posted Jan 23, 2020

According to a Vox interview by Sean Illing with Peter Pomerantsev, a Soviet-born journalist and author of This Is Not Propaganda: Adventures in the War Against Reality, a noticeable shift in the Soviet propaganda strategy emerged in post-Soviet Russia that focused not so much on presenting falsehoods per se as breeding disbelief in facts for its own sake:



Which brings us, of course, to the striking similarity of Russia’s propaganda machine to the exploitation of the illusory truth effect in US politics today. As Illing points out:


Pomerantsev describes how he has witnessed Russian propaganda strategies spread across the globe over the past decade:


Whether or not the authors are aware of it, this passage perfectly illustrates the illusory truth effect. President Trump tends to employ short phrases of uncertain attribution (“A lot of people are saying…”) that contradict facts, repeating them ad infinitum (e.g. “Stable genius!” “Rigged!” “No collusion, no obstruction!” “Fake news!” “Witchhunt!” "Read the transcripts!") until even those who identify with the opposing political party who know statements are lies might come to believe them on some level. Although President Trump has been ridiculed for speaking at a fourth-grade reading level and relying on Twitter to communicate not only to the American public but foreign entities, it may be that his vocabulary, syntax, and preferred communication medium are intentional if not taken directly from a page in the Russian propaganda playbook.

With former Trump campaign manager Steve Bannon calling for the “destruction of the administrative state,” eroding the very concept of truth seems to be part of a larger effort designed to tear down the authority of previously respected institutions or, as journalist Jesse Singal put it, to “undermine order itself.”

Although the erosion of truth and the rejection of expertise is often a core component of populist movements, Arendt and scholars of her work have highlighted that the path from populism to authoritarianism, totalitarianism, and fascism can be short, direct, and downhill (see here and here for accounts of how this has happened in recent history around the world). Whether that goal is Bannon’s, Trump’s, or Putin’s and how they are connected remains unclear. What is clear is the threat that goal poses to “truth, justice, and the American way.”

Researchers at RAND are pessimistic about “traditional counterpropaganda efforts,” noting that we shouldn’t “expect to counter the firehose of falsehood with the squirt gun of truth.”9 Indeed, recent evidence suggests that there are several barriers to countering misinformation. One is that successfully correcting misinformation may require more cognitive ability than many voters have, regardless of political affiliation.11 Another is that the illusory truth effect seems to include not only faulty perceptions of truth, but also a diminished sense that repeating disinformation is unethical12 such that we risk becoming inured to the pervasiveness of lying, with liars in turn no longer bothering to deny that they’ve lied.

The internet also represents a major obstacle to countering the illusory truth effect. While the internet’s unprecedented democratization of knowledge has fueled populist movements across the world, the hope that truth would “rise to the top” has not been realized. On the contrary, research has shown that online disinformation spreads “farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly” than the truth.13 Together with the illusory truth effect, the internet has allowed authoritarian political movements to spread rampant disinformation and erode trust in not only the “fake news” media but the concept of truth altogether by delegitimizing objective reality.

Still, recent research provides us with some pointers on how we might stem the noxious impact of disinformation. In one recent experiment, encouraging young people to act like “fact checkers” mitigated the illusory truth effect.14 Similar studies have shown that “inoculation strategies” warning people about likely exposure to misinformation and beating misinformation to the punch, can reduce susceptibility to being taken in by disinformation.15 Based on such findings, RAND researchers suggest that forewarning people about how propagandists exploit the illusory truth effect to manipulate audiences is likely to be more effective than specific refutations.9 And so…

The illusory truth effect is real.

It is commonly exploited as a tool of political propaganda.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...ry-truth-lies-and-political-propaganda-part-2
 
Back
Top