When politicians make statements about fake news, which is then reported on by media outlets, the statement is, in fact, true. BUT, it is true only when viewed through the lens of 'understanding-how-the-language-is-used-by-those-in-the-know'.
People in positions of power know very well the power of language. Psychologically speaking, language is the 'boundary-of-the-realm'. Our thoughts, in a general sense, manifest as a string of words. Words encapsulate concepts... Imagine a circle. The circle itself is the word, while the concept is the 'shade' of the interior.
When you or I hear a given word in a given context, the 'shade-of-the-interior' is generally similar - minor variations are bound to occur do to variations in upbringing, experience, education, etc.. For example, "Johnny" broke his leg while playing a game of football in high school. When he hears the word football, he will inevitably, by association, remember his injury and all that went along with that. While "Jerry" went on to win the collegiate championship in a starring role. The 'shade-of-meaning' of the word football will be different for "Johnny" and "Jerry". This is a somewhat extreme example, but the same principle applies to all language. Football will be, let us say, 'green' for everyone, but the exact shade of green will have variations.
Now, in a general sense, I think part of the 'shade' of the word news is "reporting on the truth". So when a person hears, over and over, "fake news! fake news!" they will 'think' "fake reporting of the truth". Of course, we who are on the edge of the awakening portion of humanity know damn well that the "news" is government propaganda, and the politicians know it too!!! When they say "fake news", what they are really saying is "the truth/fake propaganda". And this trend of truth telling in the population, and the fact that people are listening, terrifies them!
You see, politicians are speaking to two different groups, using the very same words. Us 'deplorables', and the 'in-crowd'. The 'shade' of the words for them is a completely different 'color'. Hell, beyond that. It is like comparing a penguin to the moon in some cases.
To close, I will parse a statement by Gee Dubya, the meaning of which statement for us was patently false, while the meaning for them was very true: "They hate us for our freedoms". We all know how most people understood that statement. "They (the rest of the world) hate us (the elite) for our freedoms (the liberties we take to pilfer the world, consequences be damned)", while for us it was "They (the terrorists) hate us for our freedom".
By controlling the narrative --- the language used --- they control the thoughts of the populace.
Or so they hope.
--Homalinadir
Too many words.
Politicians are liars
There...fixed it for you.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit