Obviously, the existence of a totalitarian system is not the premise for disinformation. Democracies in a way praise disinformation. For example in the daily news: first the tragedies and catastrophes, afterwards the better stories, and finally the news end with something positive. This makes people satisfied and does not leave them with the feeling that everything is lost. The majority of politically uncomfortable news do not reach the light of the media at all.
Propaganda seems to work even better in a democratic society, as the population is not as suspicious as in a totalitarian system. Democratic systems tend to use disinformation especially during the times of elections. They use it while fighting against the others. The media decide which role they want to play in all that.
Already the selection of news can be disinformation.
"This system of thought control is not centrally managed, although sometimes the government orchestrates a particular propaganda campaign." (
It is very common that political interests are criticized by the media. But as soon as the so-called national interest is in danger, it is most of all the government's strategy that molests them, but no longer the issue itself. Which U.S.-newspaper ever criticized the American participation in the Kosovo or the Gulf War with hard words? Wasn't it simply the way how propaganda was done that was criticized? But even this only got into the news after the war (and that in both cases).
And if the population doesn't want a certain war then there is always the excuse that it has to be done that way to secure the national interests. Who - especially in patriot nations like the USA or Great Britain - would want or dare (from a moral perspective) to speak against this?
"It is sufficient that people obey; what they think is a secondary concern." (
The media are supposed to change information into public information. Out of this results that any lack of media-liberty means a lack of democracy as well.
Still, the instruments and rituals of democracy are never questioned officially.
TEXTBLOCK 1/5 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611661/100438658128
The magic word is credibility.
Disinformation can mean leaving out important informations. Telling lies is not the only method of disinformation. The not telling also creates thoughts and delegates them into certain directions, whereas other models of thinking are left out.
Like this, the deaths on the own side are adjusted downwards whereas the victims of the enemy are counted proudly - as long as they are not civilians. The post-Gulf War period demonstrated how the population reacts if the number of innocent victims is much higher than expected. It was the fact of those numbers that provoked the biggest part of the post-war critique.
The media in democratic states tend to criticize this, which does not mean that they always want to be free of governmental influence. They can choose to help the government in a single case by not writing anything against it or by writing pro-government stories.
At the same time every democracy has undemocratic parts in it - which is already part of democracy itself. There are situations when a democratic government may find it essential to put pressure on the media to inform the population in a certain way; and also censorship is nothing that can only be connected to dictatorship; just think of the Falkland War, the Gulf-War or the Kosovo-War.
TEXTBLOCK 2/5 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611661/100438658709
A certain problem today is an inflation of disinformation-messages. If the people get used to them, it gets easier for them to detect the lies. In a way disinformation is a tool of social control, holding down revolutionary emotions and thoughts; but also the contrary can be true.
Disinformation spread on purpose can not only change thoughts but it might as well be able to transform history by changing the meaning and interpretation of past events.
Therefore confidence and authority play a special role. Without a certain degree of legitimization, disinformation will not work, as people need something to refer to when they get informed. Disinformation lives on the fact that one can hardly exist without trusting other people. Thus, the source to spread a disinformation with, has to be well elected. Choosing the wrong way/media can destroy an entire campaign
TEXTBLOCK 3/5 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611661/100438658077
Still, disinformation and propaganda are nothing magic. They can change things, but supposedly only if those things/meanings/opinions are not fixed completely.
It is never just a single idea that changes. Society is following the changes.
Thinking about disinformation brings us to the word truth, of course, and to the doubt that there is no definite truth. And truth can easily be manipulated to another truth. Just present some facts that seem to be logic and there you've got a new truth. And if the facts can supposedly be proved by empirical studies then the quality of the truth definitely rises.
That's what ideologies do all the time. And the media like to do the same thing - as a game with power or mere presentation of power?
But of course there also exist bits of disinformation which are more amusing than evil or dangerous:
- the theory of the celestro-centric world/"Hohlwelttheorie"
- the story of the German philosopher who invented an Italian philosopher, wrote books about him, even reprinted "his" texts, which had gone lost pretendedly 100 years ago - and finally lost his job and all his career when other scientists found out that everything had been made up.
TEXTBLOCK 4/5 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611661/100438658633
Part of the disinformation-campaign of most Western states is the connection between the free market and democracy, pretending that the one entails the other. Development assistance is built on this false spiral. And the vision that the Westerners are needed, that they should intervene and influence, is a perpetuate misunderstanding on purpose. Those who earn money and a good reputation out of it, go on with this atrocity story.
TEXTBLOCK 5/5 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611661/100438658619
Communications satellites are relay stations for radio signals and provide reliable and distance-independent high-speed connections even at remote locations without high-bandwidth infrastructure.
On point-to-point transmission, the transmission method originally employed on, satellites face increasing competition from
In the future, satellites will become stronger, cheaper and their orbits will be lower; their services might become as common as satellite TV is today.
For more information about satellites, see How Satellites Work (
The Internet Software Consortium (ISC) is a nonprofit corporation dedicated to the production of high-quality reference implementations of Internet standards that meet production standards. Its goal is to ensure that those reference implementations are properly supported and made freely available to the Internet community.
http://www.isc.org
Josef Goebbels (1897-1945) was Hitler's Minister for Propaganda and Public Enlightenment. He had unlimited influence on the press, the radio, movies and all kind of literary work in the whole Reich. In 1944 he received all power over the Total War. At the same time he was one of the most faithful followers of Hitler - and he followed him into death in 1945.
Bertolt Brecht (1898-1956), probably was the most influential German dramatist and
theoretician of the theater in the 20th century. During the existence of the Third Reich he fled from Germany to Scandinavia and to the USA, where he tried to go on with his work. In the 1950s he became director of the newly founded Berliner Ensemble, in East Berlin.
for more information see:
INTELSAT is in business since 1964 and owns and operates a global communications satellite system of 17 geostationary satellites providing capacity for voice, video, corporate/private networks and Internet in more than 200 countries and territories.
http://www.intelsat.int/index.htm
Edward S. Herman is Professor Emeritus in Finance, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania. Author of several books like The Myth of the Liberal Media: An Edward Herman Reader or Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (he wrote that book - and others - together with
Noam Chomsky (* 1928) works as a U.S.-linguist, writer, political activist and journalist. He is teaching at the MIT (= Massachusetts Institute of Technology) as a professor of linguistics, specializing on structural grammar and the change of language through technology and economy - and the social results of that. When he stood up against the Vietnam War he became famous as a "radical leftist". Since then he has been one of the most famous critics of his country.