Still not getting why you don't think keyword hijacking, decoy narratives, negative framing of whistleblowers, pictograms, etc. aren't the very humidity of psy-ops.
I
do think all of that. But your examples of it suck, Hugh.
Mnemonic inoculation or inoculation theory is involved.
Neuroscience, linguistics, narrative structure, etc.
Okay.
If people first associate the keyword "McGill" with a satisfying upbeat story with ubermale Clooney instead of Nazi abuse, that's good counter-propaganda.
Besides the movie, there's reinforcing sing-along products with other happiness-producing artists also reinforcing the benign association.
Do you know how many instances of the proper noun "McGill" there are in the English language? You took one of the probably thousands of thousands of times "McGill" was used in a pop culture artifact and decided it was the key to a psy-ops. The McGill experiments are definitely something the elite would want to keep hidden and/or preemptively undermine, but achieving that goal via naming Clooney's character in Oh Brother -- not even the name mostly associated with him in the movie but his last name, something one would probably only see typed out on imdb.com -- is utterly fucking implausible. Because it would be totally fucking ineffective. I guarantee that the only association there -- either conscious or unconscious -- made by anyone in the entire fucking world was made by you.
Pentagon definition of counter-propaganda:
"Any action taken to minimize the effect of hostile information."
Okay.
Remember the audience, FB. It's not you or me. It is the still large audience of people who Don't Know Yet what military-intelligence will do to them in the name of national security.
Giving the character McGill as a last name doesn't
do anything to them.
That's the problem here, that's why your example sucks.
Well done. Thanks!
