Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

[Guest guest]

Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

http://www.dabney.com/wacomuseum/library/martin1.html

 

Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Originally Thirteen Techniques for Truth Suppression

 

by David Martin, author of America's Dreyfus Affair

 

Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a

government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other

techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily

upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.

 

1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.

2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the " how dare you? " gambit.

3. Characterize the charges as " rumors " or, better yet, " wild rumors. " If, in

spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the

suspicious facts, it can only be through " rumors. " (If they tend to believe the

" rumors " it must be because they are simply " paranoid " or " hysterical. " )

4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspect of the weakest

charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors and give

them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful

alike.

5. Call the skeptics names like " conspiracy theorist, " " nut, " " ranter, "

" kook, " " crackpot, " and of course, " rumor monger. " Be sure, too, to use heavily

loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the

" more reasonable " government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid

fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For

insurance, set up your own " skeptics " to shoot down.

6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly

that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a

partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated

adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).

7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be

very useful.

8. Dismiss the charges as " old news. "

9. Come half-clean. This is also known as " confession and avoidance " or

" taking the limited hangout route. " This way, you create the impression of

candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless,

less-than-criminal " mistakes. " This stratagem often requires the embrace of a

fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective

damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics

to carefully limited markets.

10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately

unknowable.

11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With

thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. For example:

We have a completely free press. If they know of evidence that the Bureau of

Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) had prior knowledge of the Oklahoma City

bombing they would have reported it. They haven't reported it, so there was no

prior knowledge by the BATF. Another variation on this theme involves the

likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press that would report the leak.

12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. For example: If Vince

Foster was murdered, who did it and why?

13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing

distractions.

14. Scantly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is

sometimes referred to as " bump and run " reporting.

15. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the

" facts " furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.

16. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges " expose "

scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents

and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who

will pretend to spend their own money.

17. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, " What

could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups

defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics? " Don't

the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio,

and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening

out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control

enough, but, obviously, it is not.

 

Earlier versions of this page: