We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness

Author Topic: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness  (Read 75910 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PUPAGANDA

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
  • Red Baron
We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« on: September 08, 2009, 07:52:33 AM »


We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness

Nathan Janes
PUPAGANDA.com

Since its inception in American homes in the late 1930's, television has essentially given America it's culture. Today, television watching is the most popular leisure activity as more and more people are choosing the fantasy world of TV over engaging with others in real communication and experiences. Where people once wanted to explore the wonders of the world and nature, now many explore the world outside their homes only through what they view on television. Once a vast majority is living the same reality through television, then they are more predictable and easily managed. The television does an excellent job placing everyone that watches it on the same page, all sharing the same views, worries, interests, and idols.

Through the television, we are trained from birth to death as to what to believe. Many studies have demonstrated that the young unquestioningly accept whatever reality is presented by television. Impressionable children will often spend hours in front of the television each day as it is used as a trust worthy babysitter. As they sit down for their daily intake of cartoons, children's programming and commercials, many parents fail to realize what lessons the television is teaching their children. And so culture and norms of behavior are often more strongly influenced by what is on television rather than by what parents are teaching children. The parents of today grew up in front of the television as well and so the television is not often questioned and instead accepted as a part of the family's daily life. Children who grow up in front of the TV learn to arrange their lives around TV programming and will likely grow up to be adults who get their entertainment, news, and information from it.

Heavy television watching is culturally accepted and expected in our society. In fact, the act of not watching TV can actually offend some people. With the average American adult watching more than 4 hours of television each day, the television plays a major role in continually creating the reality in which we live. Those who create the television programming- the 6 corporations and little over 100 board members who control all American mass media outlets shape this reality. The interests of these corporations and those who lead them are to make money for both the media corporations and those corporations that the board members have special ties to. Rather than creating television shows that engages critical thinking and keeps Americans well informed on topics that may affect their well being, the TV causes us to see ourselves as consumers who need to be entertained. Television is creating a culture of occupied minds- an apathetic and passive population only interested in being entertained by mindless trivia with no interest in analyzing information and instead relying on the TV for all answers.

TV has lead us into a world controlled by science and run by experts. In predicting a "Scientific Dictatorship," Aldous Huxley, author of Brave New World and well known for his studies on the development of new techniques by which to control and direct human behavior, described a world run by experts, which isn't hard to imagine when we've been trained through our television sets to always listen to experts. Major media promotes experts on just about every topic you can imagine while implying that the public is too dumb or uneducated to make their own decisions about such topics as vaccinations, financial management, and medical interventions. In this way, the television is creating in individuals a sense of learned helplessness, leaving us dependent on those given to us as experts to direct our decisions and actions.

The act of watching TV regularly is obedience to those in control. For total control in any system, everyone must be predictable. TV creates a collectivism society, where to be an individual is seen as an enemy to the peace within the collective society. Groupthink is essential in a society where everyone is to be controlled by those in power. Aldous Huxley once said, "It is possible to make people contented with their servitude. I think this can be done. I think it has been done in the past. I think it could be done even more effectively now because you can provide them with bread and circuses and you can provide them with endless amounts of distractions and propaganda."

Source: http://pupaganda.com/originals/Total_indoctrination.html
Almost our entire world now is a hoax! Everything you know as Truth...is Fake.

Offline larsonstdoc

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,341
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2009, 08:50:05 AM »


  Now with HDTV it is a lot worse.  Tim Rifat is an expert on this.  The link below will take you to some of his talks on HDTV.  One of the the main reasons for HDTV is for "their" control of us.

  http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=99054.0
I'M A DEPLORABLE KNUCKLEHEAD THAT SUPPORTS PRESIDENT TRUMP.  MAY GOD BLESS HIM AND KEEP HIM SAFE.

Offline PUPAGANDA

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
  • Red Baron
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #2 on: September 11, 2009, 07:12:55 AM »
Thanks for the link!

Incase you missed it, here is this article featured on Infowars.com

http://www.infowars.com/we-are-living-in-an-artificially-induced-state-of-consciousness/

Thanks Alex!!
Almost our entire world now is a hoax! Everything you know as Truth...is Fake.

Offline 2Revolutions

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,761
  • For we wrestle not with flesh and blood
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #3 on: September 11, 2009, 09:56:52 AM »
bump

Those who wish to remain ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, want what never was and what never will be.  - Thomas Jefferson

Offline PUPAGANDA

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
  • Red Baron
Almost our entire world now is a hoax! Everything you know as Truth...is Fake.

Offline JesusItrustinYou

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #5 on: September 11, 2009, 04:00:53 PM »
And what really bothers me is that there's never anything good on.

Offline Monkeypox

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,844
  • He Loved Big Brother
    • Monkeypox
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #6 on: September 11, 2009, 04:06:03 PM »
And what really bothers me is that there's never anything good on.

Dropped cable TV 8 months ago and don't miss it a bit.
War Is Peace - Freedom Is Slavery - Ignorance Is Strength


"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."

—Thomas Jefferson

Offline thnkfstpal

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 879
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #7 on: September 11, 2009, 04:11:33 PM »
Dropped cable TV 8 months ago and don't miss it a bit.

Closing in on a year with no TV and my Goodness do I feel better.

Offline JesusItrustinYou

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #8 on: September 11, 2009, 04:13:48 PM »
Closing in on a year with no TV and my Goodness do I feel better.
I finally got the TV out of my room and my life is definately better.   I read so much more. 

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,652
  • It's the TV, stupid!
    • JACKSON HOLLY'S OLD HOME PLACE
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #9 on: September 11, 2009, 05:11:27 PM »


We sound like a bunch of recovering alcoholics, don't we?  :-X


Irobot:
Quote
"HDTV Mass Mind Control" Tim Rifat on Jeff Rense Radio MP3
http://snardfarker.ning.com/xn/detail/2649739:BlogPost:43723

 ... go listen ASAP if you haven't already.

They apparently have a lot of FUN STUFF planned for the sheeple with this DigitalHD thing. How much more dumbed-down can we get?



St. Augustine: “The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself."

Offline ES

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,640
  • Old Iron Sides: Enemy of Tyrannical Scum
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #10 on: September 11, 2009, 05:26:56 PM »
I kicked the habit when I got hooked on the harder stuff; the truth.  :o
"My heroes are people who monkey wrench the new world order". - Jello Biafra

Offline changedname

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,373
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #11 on: September 11, 2009, 05:42:51 PM »
Yes, I must confess too .. I to am a recovering tvaholic! But no shame I have to say I am proud! I cant remember the last time I turned on the tube and when I get near one I get restless and just want to leave the room!

Offline PUPAGANDA

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
  • Red Baron
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #12 on: September 12, 2009, 12:42:13 AM »
Good to hear all these enlightening stories! We need to get the word out on how tv's are everywhere for a reason and educate people on how they're thoughts and ideas are being shaped everyday by the television.

I want to see someone come out with an amazing documentary on this topic. I don't believe there is any movie that explains it in depth and covers all the manipulations and control it has over the masses.

It creates culture and shapes the future.

Almost our entire world now is a hoax! Everything you know as Truth...is Fake.

Offline Fight The Future

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #13 on: September 12, 2009, 03:03:58 PM »
Months ago I dropped the tube, ditched my cellphone, and began eating much healthier. Physically, mentally and spiritually I've never been healthier.

Now I just have to do something about these chemtrails

Offline 2Revolutions

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,761
  • For we wrestle not with flesh and blood
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #14 on: September 16, 2009, 09:24:50 AM »
Got rid of cable many months ago don't even remember now. Since the switch to digital from analog none of the channels work and I don't plan on buying a converter box.  Thanks government for making your the mind control device a brick.
Those who wish to remain ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, want what never was and what never will be.  - Thomas Jefferson

Offline 2Revolutions

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,761
  • For we wrestle not with flesh and blood
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #15 on: September 16, 2009, 09:31:17 AM »
Bump?

I read the article on infowars but didn't have time comment but wanted to make sure it was not buried in haystack of information on this forum.
Those who wish to remain ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, want what never was and what never will be.  - Thomas Jefferson

Offline phasma

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,197
  • Have a H.A.A.R.P.Y DAY !
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #16 on: September 16, 2009, 09:51:03 AM »
Nicely written.

And true.

What was that Jim Carey movie called that has him falling to his death (?) on a giant satelitte dish yelling the baby sitter must die !!!!!

Yeah, he had a point (even if he was a fictional character)
Things are not what they appear to be: nor are they otherwise - Surangama Sutra

Damascus

  • Guest
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #17 on: September 16, 2009, 10:09:03 AM »
I see your points. This is the main reason I have difficulty communicating with most other people.  Their minds are set up for entertainment, trivia, and mass consumption. They literally have the attitude Of "how dare you analyze and question the status quo". This is exasperated by the fact most of these people think they are original and extremely intelligent for knowing a bunch of trivia (not for analsys).

Offline unbound

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #18 on: September 16, 2009, 10:12:55 AM »
In fact, the act of not watching TV can actually offend some people.


It's so damned true. I'm currently in a battle with my girlfriend and she hates it that I have absolutely no interest in watching TV. I'm waking her up slowly, and she's starting to come around. I'll try to get her to read the article later.
Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds - Albert Einstein
The ultimate ignorance is the rejection of something you know nothing about and refuse to investigate

Offline PUPAGANDA

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
  • Red Baron
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #19 on: September 16, 2009, 12:21:17 PM »
Thank you for your comments..... I'm glad my article and artwork are creating conscious thought in the people that read it.
Almost our entire world now is a hoax! Everything you know as Truth...is Fake.

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #20 on: September 16, 2009, 12:32:59 PM »
Thank you for your comments..... I'm glad my article and artwork are creating conscious thought in the people that read it.

please add more when you can.

this is a very important topic.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline ekimdrachir

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,144
  • METATRON ON
    • Go Outside
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #21 on: September 16, 2009, 05:15:30 PM »
I've learned more about the television, one factoid is the inventor of the cathode ray rube invented it to channel spirits, and even put a malta cross inside his first crt

Offline Valerius

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,865
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #22 on: September 16, 2009, 05:30:33 PM »
People really seem to be walking around in a daze for some reason these days.
"No man can put a chain about the ankle of his fellow man without at last finding the other end fastened about his own neck."  -Frederick Douglass

Offline ekimdrachir

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,144
  • METATRON ON
    • Go Outside
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #23 on: September 16, 2009, 05:41:56 PM »
My bet, shock. Ignorance, shock and denial. We need leaders, to lead! But who will follow? We all wonder..

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,101
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #24 on: September 17, 2009, 12:43:05 PM »
For those who haven't already seen the following:

-------------------------------------------

Most of the time, energy, and creativity of the electronic media, however, is devoted not to news, but to entertainment. Watching the news is not harmful to your civic health. What about television entertainment? Here we must begin with the most fundamental fact about the impact of television on Americans: Nothing else in the twentieth century so rapidly and profoundly affected our leisure.

In 1950 barely 10 percent of American homes had television sets, but by 1959, 90 percent did, probably the fastest diffusion of a technological innovation ever recorded. (The spread of Internet access will rival TV's record but probably not surpass it.) The reverberations from this lightening bolt continued unabated for decades, as per capita viewing hours grew 17-20 percent during the 1960s, by an additional 7-8 percent during the 1970s, and by another 7-8 percent from the early 1980s to the late 1990s....By 1995 viewing per TV household was more than 50 percent higher than it had been in the 1950s.

Most studies estimate that the average American now watches roughly four hours per day, very nearly the highest viewership anywhere in the world. Time researches John Robinson and Geoffrey Godbey, using the more conservative time diary technique for determining how people allocate their time, offer an estimate closer to three hours per day but conclude that as a primary activity, television absorbed almost 40 percent of the average American's free time in 1995, an increase of roughly one-third since 1965. Between 1965 and 1995 we gained an average of six hours a week in added leisure time, and we spent almost all six of those additional hours watching TV. In short, as Robinson and Godbey conclude, "Television is the 800-pound gorilla of leisure time."

The single most important consequence of the television revolution has been to bring us home. As early as 1982, a survey by Scripps-Howard reported that eight of the ten most popular leisure activities were typically based at home. Amid all the declining graphs for social and community involvement traced in the DDB Needham Life Style surveys from 1975 to 1999, one line stands out: The number of Americans who reported a preference for "spending a quiet evening at home" rose steadily. Not surprisingly, those who said so were heavily dependent on televised entertainment. While early enthusiasts for this new medium spoke eagerly of television as an "electronic hearth" that would foster family togetherness, the experience of the last half century is cautionary.

Social critic James Howard Kuntsler's polemic is not far off target:

    The American house has been TV-centered for three generations. It is the focus of family life, and the life of the house correspondingly turns inward, away from whatever occurs beyond its four walls. (TV rooms are called "family rooms" in builders' lingo. A friend who is an architect explained to me: "People don't want to admit that what the family does together is watch TV.") At the same time, the television is the family's chief connection with the outside world. The physical envelope of the house itself no longer connects their lives to the outside in any active way; rather, it seals them off from it. The outside world has become an abstraction filtered through television, just as the weather is an abstraction filtered through air conditioning.

Time diaries show that husbands and wives spend three or four times as much time watching television together as they spend talking to each other, and six to seven times as much as they spend in community activities outside the home. Moreover, as the number of TV sets per household multiplies, even watching together becomes rarer. More and more of our television viewing is done entirely alone. At least half of all Americans usually watch by themselves, one study suggests, while according to another, one-third of all television viewing is done alone. Among children aged 8-18 the figures are even more startling: less than 5 percent of their TV-watching is done with their parents, and more than one-third is done entirely alone.

Television viewing has steadily become a more habitual, less intentional part of our lives. Four times between 1979 and 1993 the Roper polling organization posed a revealing pair of questions to Americans:

    When you turn the television on, do you usually turn it own first and then look for something to watch, or do you usually turn it on only if you know there's a certain program you want to see?

    Some people like to have a TV set on, sort of in the background, even when they're not actually watching it. Do you find you frequently will just have the set on even though you're not really watching it, or [do you either watch it or turn it off]?

Selective viewers (that is, those who turn on the television only to see a specific program and turn it off when they're not watching) are significantly more involved in community life than habitual viewers (those who turn the TV on without regard to what's on and leave it on in the background), even controlling for education and other demographic factors. For example, selective viewers are 23 percent more active in grassroots organizations and 33 percent more likely to attend public meetings than other demographically matched Americans....

Habitual viewing is not the only way in which generations differ in their television-viewing customs. Another is channel surfing. Figure 58, drawn from a 1996 Yankelovich Monitor survey, shows that when they are actually watching TV, younger generations (including boomers, compared with their elders) are more likely to surf from program to program, "grazing" or "multitasking" rather than simply following a single narrative. Other scholars have found that compared with teenagers in the 1950s, young people in the 1990s have fewer, weaker, and more fluid friendships. Although I know no systematic evidence that supports this hunch, I suspect that the link between channel surfing and social surfing is more than metaphorical....

So far we have discovered that television watching and especially dependence upon television for entertainment are closely correlated with civic disengagement. Correlation, however, does not prove causation. An altnerative explanation is this: People who are social isolates to begin with gravitate toward the tube as the line of leisurely least resistance. Without true experimental evidence -- in which randomly selected individuals are exposed (or not exposed) to television over long periods of time -- we cannot be sure that television itself is the cause of disengagement. (Since the putative effects of TV presumably build up over years, a few minutes' viewing in a university lab is unlikely to replicate the deeper effects that we're talking about here.)

Strikingly direct evidence about the causal direction comes from a range of intriguing studies of communities conducted just before and just after television was introduced. The most remarkable of these studies emerged from three isolated communities in northern Canada in the 1970s. Owing only to poor reception, residents of one (given the pseudonym Notel by the researchers) were without television as the study began. The "treatment" whose effects were observed was the introduction of a single channel to Notel residents -- the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). Life in Notel was compared with that of two other communities, Unitel and Multitel. Though it was very similar to Notel in other respects, during the two years of the study TV reception in Unitel went from CBC only to CBC plus the three American commercial networks. Multitel was similar in all relevant respects to the other two towns, although removed somewhat geographically. Residents of Multitel could receive all four channels throughout the span of the research.

Canadian researcher Tannis MacBeth Williams and her colleagues explained why this triad of towns consisted of a true experiment:

    Except for anachronistically lacking television reception in 1973, (Notel) was typical. It was accessible by road, had daily bus service in two directions, and its ethnic mix was not unusual. The town just happened to be located in a valley in such a way that the transmitter meant to serve the area did not provide television reception for most residents.

Significant also is the fact that this study was conducted before the widespread availability of VCRs and satellite dishes. In other words, there will likely never be another example like this of an essentially TV-free community in an industrialized nation. The results clearly showed that the introduction of television deflated Notel residents' participation in community activities. As the researchers report succinctly,

    Before Notel had television, residents in the longitudinal sample attended a greater variety of club and other meetings than did residents of both Unitel and Multitel, who did not differ. There was a significant decline in Notel following the introduction of television, but no change in either Unitel or Multitel.

The researchers also asked whether television affected only those who were peripherally involved in community activities or also the active leaders. Their conclusion:

    Television apparently affects participation in community activities for individuals who are central to those activities, not just those who are more peripherally involved. Residents are more likely to be centrally involved in their community's activities in the absence than in the presence of television.

This study strongly suggests that television is not merely a concomitant of lower community involvement, but actually a cause of it. A major effect of television's arrival was the reduction in participation in social, recreational, and community activities among people of all ages. Television privatizes leisure time....

If TV steals time, it also seems to encourage lethargy and passivity. Time researchers Robert Kubey and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi used an ingenious method to track our use of time and its effects on our psychic well-being. They persuaded subjects to carry beepers with them around the clock for a week, and when the beepers were randomly triggered, the subjects wrote down what they were doing and how they felt. Television viewing, Kubey and Csikszentmihalyi found, is a relaxing, low-concentration activity. Viewers feel passive and less alert after watching. On heavy-viewing evenings, people are also likely to engage in other low-energy, even slothful activities, whereas on light-viewing evenings, the same people spent more time outside the home in activities like sports and club meetings. Heavy viewing is associated with lots of free time, loneliness, and emotional difficulties. TV is apparently especially attractive for people who feel unhappy, particularly when there is nothing else to do.

TV itself is probably not the primary cause of these negative feelings, but it does not help much, either, except as a momentary escape. As Kubey and Csikszentmihalyi summarize their findings,

    Heavy viewers spend more time with TV, but find it is less rewarding....Although...feeling badly in unstructured and solitary time leads to the use of television,...heavy viewing and the rapid montage of much contemporary television may also help reinforce an intolerance in the heavy viewers for daily moments that are not similarly chocked full of sight and sound....It seems likely that heavy viewing helps perpetuate itself. Some television viewers grow dependent on the ordered stimuli of television or similar entertainments and become increasingly incapable of filling leisure time without external aids.

Kubey and Csikszentmihalyi report that these psychological concomitants of television watching are common in many cultures. British social psychologist Michael Argyle found that TV induces an emotional state best described as "relaxed, drowsy, and passive." British researchers Sue Bowden and Avner Offer report:

    Television is the cheapest and least demanding way of averting boredom. Studies of television find that of all household activities, television requires the lowest level of concentration, alertness, challenge, and skill....activation rates while viewing are very low, and viewing is experienced as a relaxing release of tension. Metabolic rates appear to plunge while children are watching TV, helping them to gain weight.

As Kubey and Csikszentmihalyi conclude, television is surely habit-forming and may be mildly addictive. In experimental studies viewers generally demand a major bribe to give it up, even though viewers consistently report that television viewing is less satisfying than other leisure activities and even than work. In 1977 the Detroit Free Press was able to find only 5 out of 120 families willing to give up television for a month in return for $500. People who did give up TV reportedly experience boredom, anxiety, irritation, and depression. One woman observed, "It was terrible. We did nothing -- my husband and I talked."

As with other addictions, conclude Bowden and Offer,

    viewers are prone to habituation, desensitization, and satiation...A researcher reported in 1989 that "virtually everyone in the television industry ardently believes that the audience attention span is growing shorter, and that to hold the audience, television editing must be even faster paced and present more and more exciting visual material."...As consumers become accustomed to the new forms of stimulation, they require and even stronger dose....

Like other addictive or compulsive behaviors, television seems to be a surprisingly unsatisfying experience. Both time diaries and the "beeper" studies find that for the average viewer television is about as enjoyable as housework and cooking, ranking well below all other leisure activities and indeed below work itself. TV's dominance in our lives reflects not its sublime pleasures, but its minimal costs. Time researchers John Robinson and Geoffrey Godbey conclude:

    Much of television's attraction is that it is ubiquitous and undemanding....As an activity, television viewing requires no advance planning, costs next to nothing, requires no physical effort, seldom shocks or surprises, and can be done in the comfort of one's own home.

Another reason that television viewing is so negatively linked to social connectedness may be that it provides a kind of pseudopersonal connection to others. Anyone who has encountered a television personality face-to-face knows the powerful feeling that you already know this person. The daily cheer of morning anchors or the weekly drama of well-loved characters reassures us that we may know these people, care about them, are involved in their lives -- and no doubt they reciprocate those feelings (or so we subconsciously feel).

Communications theorist Joshua Meyrowitz notes that the electronic media allow social ties to be divorced from physical encounters. "Electronic media creates ties and associations that compete with those formed through live interaction in specific locations. Live encounters are certainly more 'special' and provide stronger and deeper relationships, but their relative number is decreasing." Political communications specialist Roderick Hart argues that television as a medium creates a false sense of companionship, making people feel intimate, informed, clever, busy, and important. The result is a kind of "remote-control politics," in which we as viewers feel engaged with our community without the effort of actually being engaged. Like junk food, TV, especially TV entertainment, satisfies cravings without real nourishment.

By making us aware of every social and personal problem imaginable, television also makes us less likely to do anything about it. "When the problems of all others become relatively equal in their seeming urgency," Meyrowitz notes, "it is not surprising that many people turn to take care of 'number one.'" In a similar vein, political scientist Shanto Iyengar has shown experimentally that prevailing television coverage of problems such as poverty leads viewers to attribute those problems to individual rather than societal failings and thus to shirk our own responsibility for helping to solve them. Political scientist Allan McBride showed in a careful content analysis of the most popular TV programs that "television programs erode social and political capital by concentrating on characters and stories that portray a way of life that weakens group attachments and social/political commitment." Television purveys a disarmingly direct and personal view of world events in a setting dominated by entertainment values. Television privileges personalities over issues and communities of interest over communities of place. In sum, television viewing may be so strongly linked to civic disengagement because of the psychological impact of the medium itself.

Perhaps, too, the message -- in other words, the specific programmatic content -- is also responsible for TV's apparent anticivic effects. The DDB Needham Life Style survey allows us to explore this possibility because, in addition to questions about social connectedness and civic involvement, the surveys elicit information about which specific programs the respondents "watch because you really like it." While causality is impossible to extract from such evidence, we can construct a rough-and-ready ranking of which programs attract and/or create the most civic and least civic audiences.

At the top of the pro-civic hierarchy (controlling, as always, for standard demographic characteristics, such as age and social class) are news programs and educational television. In the late 1990s the audiences for programs like the network news and public affairs presentations, NewsHour and other PBS shows, were generally more engaged in community life than other Americans, in part because these audiences tended to avoid other TV fare. At the other end of the scale fell action dramas (exemplified in an earlier era by The Dukes of Hazzard and Miami Vice), soap operas (such as Dallas and Melrose Place), and so-called reality TV (such as America's Most Wanted and A Current Affair).

One way of gauging the impact of different types of programming on civic engagement (as distinct from simply the amount of time spent before the tube) is to compare the effects of increasing doses of news programs and of daytime TV, controlling not only for education, income, sex, age, race, employment and marital status, and the like, but also for the total time spent watching TV. As figure 69 shows, the more time spent watching news, the more active one is in the community, whereas the more time spent watching soap operas, game shows, and talk shows, the less active one is in the community. In other words, even among people who spend the same number of hours watching TV, what they watch is closely correlated with how active they are in community life.

The clear distinction between the NewsHour audience and the Jerry Springer Show audience underscores the fact that not all television is anti-social. Experimental research has shown that pro-social programming can have pro-social effects, such as encouraging altruism. Moreover, television (especially, but not only, public affairs programming) can sometimes reinforce a wider sense of community by communicating a common experience to the entire nation, such as happened in the Kennedy assassination, the Challenger explosion, and the Oklahoma City bombing. These were shared national experiences only because only because television brought the same painful images into our homes. Television at its civic best can be a gathering place, a powerful force for bridging social differences, nurturing solidarity, and communicating essential civic information.

To this list of shared experiences, however, we must add the deaths of Diana and JFK Jr. and the O.J. trial, all of which purveyed more melodrama than civic enlightenment. The bonds nurtured by these common experiences are psychologically compelling, as virtually all of us can testify. But they are generally not sociologically compelling, in the sense of leading to action. Each episode is captivating, but few lead to enduring changes in the way we behave or connect. Child psychologists speak of a fairly primitive stage of social development called "parallel play" -- two kids in a sandbox, each playing with a toy but not really interacting with each other. In healthy development children outgrow parallel play. But the public spectacles of television leave us at that arrested stage of development, rarely moving beyond parallel attentiveness to the same external stimulus.

Television "in the wild," so to speak, is represented mostly by programs that are empirically linked to civic disengagement. Those program types that are most closely associated with civic isolation constitute a massive and growing share of television programming. "Target marketing" and the advent of five-hundred-channel cable TV portend a further fragmentation of audiences along the lines of social, economic, and personal interest. According to Nielsen Media Research, the number of channels received by the average household soared from nineteen in 1985 to forty-nine in 1997 and continues to rise. The ability of television to create a single national "water-cooler" culture has shrunk, as fewer and fewer of us watch common programs. In the early 1950s two-thirds of all Americans tuned in and watched the top-rated programs (I Love Lucy); in the early 1970s the top-rated program (All in the Family) drew about half of the national TV audience; by the mid-1990s the audience share of ER and Seinfeld was barely one-third. This trend toward market segmentation provides choice and presumably thus enhances consumer satisfaction, but it also undercuts TV's once vaunted role in bringing us together.

Another probable effect of television (not just programming, but also the associated advertising) is its encouragement of materialist values. For example, according to media researcher George Gerbner and his colleagues, heavy viewing adolescents "were more likely to want high status jobs that would give them a chance to earn a lot of money but also wanted to have their jobs relatively easy with long vacation time to do other things." As we shall see in more detail in the next chapter, materialism among college freshmen has risen notably during the era of maximum television exposure, and while in college, students who watch more television become even more materialistic, compared with their fellow students who watch less TV or none at all.

In sum, the rise of electronic communications and entertainment is one of the most powerful social trends of the twentieth century. In important respects this revolution has lightened our souls and enlightened our minds, but it has also rendered our leisure more private and passive. More and more of our time and money are spent on goods and services consumed individually, rather than those consumed collectively. Americans' leisure time can increasingly be measured -- as do strategic marketers --in terms of "eyeballs," since watching things (especially electronic screens) occupies more and more of our time, while doing things (especially with other people) occupies less and less. This emphasis on visual entertainment seems to be especially common among the generations who have been reared in the last several decades. Watching TV, videos, and computer windows onto cyberspace is ever more common. Sharing communal activities is ever less so.

The apotheosis of these trends can be found, most improbably, at the Holiday Bowling Lanes in New London, Connecticut. Mounted above each lane is a giant television screen displaying the evening's TV fare. Even on a full night of league play team members are no longer in lively conversation with one another about the day's events, public or private. Instead each stares silently at the screen while awaiting his or her turn. Even while bowling together, they are watching alone. [all boldface emphasis added]

-- Robert D. Putnam, Bowling Alone, pp. 221-245

-------------------------------------------








http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGTzClbwkc8
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline PUPAGANDA

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
  • Red Baron
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #25 on: September 26, 2009, 10:14:52 AM »
I want to put out a message that I will be creating a painting of "Obama's Dog" in the near future and I'm hoping I can get the support of our community of friends to help circulate the image and make it as popular as the Obama Joker image.
I plan to tap into the emotion of dog lovers and engage the conscious mind of the masses by creating dialog surrounding the meaning of the art.
I will also accompany the art with an article on the subject.

Please keep this in mind and I hope I can gain your support for this future project.

Thank you,

Nathan Janes
Red Baron
www.PUPAGANDA.com

Join my mailing list here:
http://visitor.constantcontact.com/manage/optin?v=0010Oqxbncv4Wreys3n_zKgioMpbkbXqJRk
Almost our entire world now is a hoax! Everything you know as Truth...is Fake.

Offline Old Fart

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #26 on: September 27, 2009, 10:00:33 AM »
"The Message" has been out there for all the world to see for a long time. I studied it in college way back in the stone age (70's) while getting my Telecommunications Degree (on the GI Bill).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7GvQdDQv8g&NR=1
"Television" is yesterday, the "Boob Tube" has been replaced with the You Tube. ;)
"To become the master, the politician poses as the servant".

Offline TheNatural

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 266
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #27 on: September 27, 2009, 10:25:42 AM »

Offline PUPAGANDA

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
  • Red Baron
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #28 on: October 01, 2009, 08:57:16 AM »
Almost our entire world now is a hoax! Everything you know as Truth...is Fake.

Offline Outer Haven

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,944
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #29 on: October 14, 2009, 11:32:34 AM »
I hate television so much now... I quit watching it over a year ago (I would occasionaly see something that somebody recommends to me, but now -- I have quit it completely!). When I think of the ridiculous amounts of time I wasted watching cartoons as a kid, it seriously makes me angry!!

Nowadays, when I see a person sitting or lying on a couch and, hypnotised, watching TV, I feel like I'm looking at some sort of mind controlled zombie, it's kind of disturbing...

As for the studies showing people are in a sleep-like state of mind when watching TV: I don't need a scientist to prove this; I know this from observing myself. When I think about how I'm watching TV, when I'm doing it, I almost feel like regaining consciousness from sleep...
"If this is the only way, we have no choice but to proceed. What is there to vacillate about?"

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,652
  • It's the TV, stupid!
    • JACKSON HOLLY'S OLD HOME PLACE
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #30 on: October 14, 2009, 12:59:45 PM »

Outer Haven:
Quote
I'm looking at some sort of mind controlled zombie, it's kind of disturbing...

Yes ... that's it! It IS disturbing.

Once you break the spell, and then observe others zombied-out like that ... it is disturbing! Especially if it is friend or family, you want to rush over and yank the d*mn controls out of their hands and slap them back into consciousness.

WAKE UP!

I can hardly be in the same room with a blaring TV anymore ...

St. Augustine: “The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself."

Offline ekimdrachir

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,144
  • METATRON ON
    • Go Outside
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #31 on: October 19, 2009, 08:44:02 PM »
I hate television so much now... I quit watching it over a year ago (I would occasionaly see something that somebody recommends to me, but now -- I have quit it completely!). When I think of the ridiculous amounts of time I wasted watching cartoons as a kid, it seriously makes me angry!!

Nowadays, when I see a person sitting or lying on a couch and, hypnotised, watching TV, I feel like I'm looking at some sort of mind controlled zombie, it's kind of disturbing...

As for the studies showing people are in a sleep-like state of mind when watching TV: I don't need a scientist to prove this; I know this from observing myself. When I think about how I'm watching TV, when I'm doing it, I almost feel like regaining consciousness from sleep...
I know exactly how you feel.

PullMyFinger

  • Guest
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #32 on: November 24, 2009, 11:30:56 PM »
I kicked the habit when I got hooked on the harder stuff; the truth.  :o
QFT ;D.One of the things I will so love when I move is NO TV. MY home MY rules and NO TV.
Did I mention I will not be owning a TV
*PMF does a happy dance*

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,101
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #33 on: March 16, 2010, 06:07:36 PM »
Child psychologists speak of a fairly primitive stage of social development called "parallel play" -- two kids in a sandbox, each playing with a toy but not really interacting with each other. In healthy development children outgrow parallel play. But the public spectacles of television leave us at that arrested stage of development, rarely moving beyond parallel attentiveness to the same external stimulus....

The apotheosis of these trends can be found, most improbably, at the Holiday Bowling Lanes in New London, Connecticut. Mounted above each lane is a giant television screen displaying the evening's TV fare. Even on a full night of league play team members are no longer in lively conversation with one another about the day's events, public or private. Instead each stares silently at the screen while awaiting his or her turn. Even while bowling together, they are watching alone.

-- Robert D. Putnam

As bad as the social phenomenon of "parallel play" was when Robert Putnam's book was initially published ten years ago, it has since become even worse due to the utter explosion in use of both cell phones and portable media players (but cell phones especially):










Pathetic and sad, is it not?
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,101
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #34 on: March 16, 2010, 06:09:59 PM »
Communications theorist Joshua Meyrowitz notes that the electronic media allow social ties to be divorced from physical encounters. "Electronic media creates ties and associations that compete with those formed through live interaction in specific locations. Live encounters are certainly more 'special' and provide stronger and deeper relationships, but their relative number is decreasing." Political communications specialist Roderick Hart argues that television as a medium creates a false sense of companionship, making people feel intimate, informed, clever, busy, and important. The result is a kind of "remote-control politics," in which we as viewers feel engaged with our community without the effort of actually being engaged. Like junk food, TV, especially TV entertainment, satisfies cravings without real nourishment.
-- Robert D. Putnam

The above reminds me of the eloquent distinction John Taylor Gatto makes between “communities” and “networks.” Notice how the portion I boldfaced dovetails with Gatto’s “trout starvation” analogy in the following excerpt (all emphasis original):

-------------------------------------

A surprising number of otherwise sensible people find it hard to see why the scope and reach of our formal schooling networks should not be increased -- by extending the school day or year, for instance -- in order to provide an economical solution to the problems posed by the decay of the American family. One reason for their preference, I think, is that they have trouble understanding the real difference between communities and networks.

Because of this confusion, they conclude that replacing a bad network with a good one is the right way to go. Since I disagree so strongly with the fundamental premise that networks are workable substitutes for families, and because from anybody's point of view a lot more school is going to cost a lot more money, I thought I'd tell you why, from a schoolteacher's perspective, we shouldn't be thinking of more school, but of less.

People who admire our school institution usually admire networking in general and have an easy time seeing it's positive side but they overlook it's negative aspect -- that networks, even good ones, drain vitality from communities and families. They provide mechanical ("by the numbers") solutions to human problems, when a slow organic process of self awareness, self discovery and cooperation is what is required if any solution is to stick.

Think of the challenge of losing weight. It's possible to employ mechanical tricks to do this quickly, but I'm told that 95% of the poor souls who do, are only fooling themselves. The weight lost this way doesn't stay off, it comes back in a short time. Other network solutions are just as temporary: a group of law students may network to pass their college exams, but preparing a brief in private practice is often a solitary, lonely experience.

Aristotle saw, a long time ago, that fully participating in a complex range of human affairs was the only way to become fully human; in that he differed from Plato. What is gained from consulting a specialist and surrendering all judgment is often more than outweighed by a permanent loss of one's own volition. This discovery accounts for the curious texture of real communication, where people argue with their doctors, lawyers and ministers, tell craftsmen what they want instead of accepting what they get, frequently make their own food from scratch instead of buying it in a restaurant or defrosting it, and perform many similar acts of participation. A real community is, of course, a collection of real families who themselves function in this participatory way.

Networks, however, don't require the whole person, but only a narrow piece. If you function in a network, it asks you to supress all the parts of yourself except the network-interest part -- a highly unnatural act although one you can get used to. In exchange, the network will deliver efficiency in the pursuit of some limited aim. This is, in fact, a devil's bargain, since on the promise of some future gain, one must surrender the wholeness of one's present humanity. If you enter into too many of these bargains you will split yourself into many specialized pieces, none of them completely human. And no time is available to reintegrate them. This, ironically, is the destiny of many successful networkers and doubtless generates much business for divorce courts and therapists of a variety of persuasions.

The fragmentation caused by excessive networking creates diminished humanity, a sense our lives are out of control because they are. If we face the present school and community crisis squarely, with hopes of finding a better way, we need to accept that schools, as networks, create a large part of the agony of modern life. We don't need more schooling, we need less.

I expect you'll want some proof of that, even though the million or so people participating in education at home these days have begun to nibble at the edge of everybody's consciousness and promise to bite their way into national attention when details of their success get around a little more. So, for those of you who haven't heard that you don't need officially certified teachers to get a good education, let me try to expose some of the machinery that makes certified schooling so bad. And remember, if you're thinking, "but it's always been that way,"…that it really hasn't.

Compulsory schooling in factory schools is a very recent, very Massachusetts/New York development. Remember, too, that until thirty-odd years ago, you could escape mass schooling after school; now it is much harder to escape because another form of mass-schooling, television, has spread all over the place to blot up any attention spared by school. So what was merely grotesque in our national treatment of the young before 1960 has become tragic now that mass commercial entertainment, as addictive as any other hallucinogenic drug, has blocked the escape routes from mass schooling.

It is a fact generally ignored when considering the communal nature of institutional families like schools, large corporations, colleges, armies, hospitals, and government agencies that they are not real communities at all, but networks. Unlike communities, networks -- as I reminded you -- have a very narrow way of allowing people to associate, and that way is always across a short spectrum of one, or at most a few, specific uniformities.

In spite of ritual moments like the Christmas party or the office softball game -- when individual human components in the network "go home", they go home alone. And in spite of humanitarian support from fellow workers that eases emergencies -- when people in networks suffer, they suffer alone, unless they have a family or community to suffer with them.

Even with college dorm "communities," those most engaging and intimate simulations of community imaginable, who among us has not experienced an awful realization after graduation that we cannot remember our friends' names or faces very well? Or who, if one can remember, feels much desire to renew those associations?

It is a puzzling development, as yet poorly understood, that the "caring" in networks is in some important way feigned. Not maliciously, but in spite of any genuine emotional attractions that might be there, human behavior in network situations often resembles a dramatic act -- matching a script produced to meet the demands of a story. And, as such, the intimate moments in networks lack the sustaining value of their counterparts in community. Those of you who remember the wonderful closeness possible in army camp life or sports teams, and who have now forgotten those you were once close with, will understand what I mean. In contrast, have you ever forgotten an uncle or an aunt?

If the loss of true community entailed by masquerading in networks is not noticed in time, a condition arises in the victim's spirit very much like the "trout starvation" that used to strike wilderness explorers whose diet was made up exclusively of stream fish. While trout quell the pangs of hunger -- and even taste good -- the eater gradually suffers from want of sufficient nutrients.

Networks like schools are not communities, just as school training is not education. By preempting fifty percent of the total time of the young, by locking young people up with other young people exactly their own age, by ringing bells to start and stop work, by asking people to think about the same thing at the same time in the same way, by grading people the way we grade vegetables -- and in a dozen other vile and stupid ways -- network schools steal the vitality of communities and replace it with an ugly mechanism. No one survives these places with his/her humanity intact, not kids, not teachers, not administrators and not parents.

A community is a place in which people face each other over time in all their human variety, good parts, bad parts, and all the rest. Such places promote the highest quality of life possible, lives of engagement and participation. This happens in unexpected ways, but it never happens when you've spent more than a decade listening to other people talk and trying to do what they tell you to do, trying to please them, after the fashion of schools. It makes a real, lifelong difference whether you avoid that training or it traps you.

An example might clarify this. Networks of urban reformers will convene to consider the problems of homeless vagrants, but a community will think of its vagrants as real people, not abstractions. Ron, Dave or Marty -- a community will call its bums by their names. It makes a difference.

People interact on thousands of invisible pathways in a community, and the emotional payoff is correspondingly rich and complex. But networks can only manage a cartoon simulation of community and provide a very limited payoff.

-- John Taylor Gatto, Dumbing Us Down, pp. 51-57




-------------------------------------
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,299
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #35 on: March 16, 2010, 06:19:35 PM »
Nice thread, saved for ltr

Offline TheNatural

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 266
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #36 on: March 19, 2010, 08:31:42 AM »
Of course, watching endless TV shows and "reality" shows does us nothing good. But I feel the need to be a little balanced about this. It cant be all work and no play, can it? I have spent a lot of time and money building my own home theatre and still in the process. Its been a dream for 20 years. It is not much point in having a home cinema and no TV, however. It is fun to watch a good movie or sports on TV from time to time, but I also find that it is wonderful to have a dark, dedicated room for listening to music too.

About HDTV. I think its a great invention and one that came as a natural progression of science, not to mesmorize us even more. It was very nice to watch the Olympics in HDTV and what it does is making the images clearer. Whats wrong with that? Besides, in a very short time something new will come to the ordinary consumer; 3D-TV. That should make for some very long treads on the forum  ;)

Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,299
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #37 on: March 20, 2010, 12:41:36 PM »
Of course, watching endless TV shows and "reality" shows does us nothing good. But I feel the need to be a little balanced about this. It cant be all work and no play, can it? I have spent a lot of time and money building my own home theatre and still in the process. Its been a dream for 20 years. It is not much point in having a home cinema and no TV, however. It is fun to watch a good movie or sports on TV from time to time, but I also find that it is wonderful to have a dark, dedicated room for listening to music too.

About HDTV. I think its a great invention and one that came as a natural progression of science, not to mesmorize us even more. It was very nice to watch the Olympics in HDTV and what it does is making the images clearer. Whats wrong with that? Besides, in a very short time something new will come to the ordinary consumer; 3D-TV. That should make for some very long treads on the forum  ;)

I agree - however, up until recently, had no idea that ALL tv is VERY wicked...I mean we know the 'ole saying, if you sleep with a dog, you will get its flees.

Again - we need to relax, but do it the RIGHT way. I mean it seems like 9/10 movies/shows on tv are garbage. Either some revenge yarn, or some Lady Gaga music video, or some NWO predictive programming show, 24/7 sports nonsense on ESPN over what sports team is better b/c they spent $$$$, and for that matter too, CNN/FOX brainwashing their audience to believe the NWO's propaganda.

Offline TheNatural

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 266
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #38 on: March 22, 2010, 04:45:36 AM »
Again - we need to relax, but do it the RIGHT way. I mean it seems like 9/10 movies/shows on tv are garbage. Either some revenge yarn, or some Lady Gaga music video, or some NWO predictive programming show, 24/7 sports nonsense on ESPN over what sports team is better b/c they spent $$$$, and for that matter too, CNN/FOX brainwashing their audience to believe the NWO's propaganda.

Yes, I too find that most of it is as you say. But from time to time I come across something worthwhile. For example the movie "Seven Pounds" with Will Smith. Now, heres a really good movie and it is a rarity in that it has no violence at all. And the Ice Age movies. Very funny for children as well as adults. It is however a pity that so many movies are speculative. Nowadays its not just speculative violence but torture which I absolutely detest and will not watch. It is as you suggest easy for us to be programmed but I think it is important to be aware of that, at the same time as one avoid getting too paranoid.

Besides, without a TV how can one watch the documentaries of Alex Jones? And is it any better to avoid TV altogether and spend hours on the computer? And how can one criticize things in our society without hearing what society via mainstream media is saying?

Offline PUPAGANDA

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
  • Red Baron
Re: We are Living in an Artificially Induced State of Consciousness
« Reply #39 on: April 17, 2010, 06:43:24 AM »
Thanks again for your interest in my work!
PLEASE SPREAD THE MESSAGE AND JOIN THE FACEBOOK "UNPLUG THE SIGNAL" PAGE
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Unplug-the-Signal/335200763749
Almost our entire world now is a hoax! Everything you know as Truth...is Fake.