Difference between revisions of "Official narrative"
m (Robin moved page Official Narrative to Official narrative) |
(Clarify) |
||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
==Fabrication by The Establishment== | ==Fabrication by The Establishment== | ||
− | The spinning of official narratives by the establishment is a routine activity. This process is often the (completely sincere) routine work from officials who prepare press releases or public statements, later edited or soundbyted by the {{ccm}} for their own purposes. | + | The spinning of official narratives by [[the establishment]] is a routine activity. This process is often the (completely sincere) routine work from officials who prepare press releases or public statements, later edited or soundbyted by the {{ccm}} for their own purposes. Conscious deception is certainly invovled in some cases, but creating official narratives is not necessarily indicative of venality; the majority are probably handled routinely by employees who have this responsibility precisely because their perspectives are sufficiently limited by the [[regulating group mind]] that they can be relied upon to create establishment friendly interpretations. |
===Censorship=== | ===Censorship=== | ||
{{FA|Censorship}} | {{FA|Censorship}} | ||
− | [[Censorship]] is one obvious sign of a duplicitously arrived at official narrative. For example, after it was shown on TV on September 11th, 2001, the collapse of WTC7 - in stark contrast to WTC1 & WTC2 - was not broadcast on {{ccm}} for several years. | + | [[Censorship]] is one obvious sign of a duplicitously arrived at official narrative. For example, after it was shown on TV on September 11th, 2001, the collapse of WTC7 - in stark contrast to WTC1 & WTC2 - was not broadcast on {{ccm}} for several years. Where a plausible official narrative can be concocted, this is generally preferred - so where censorship is evident, this is an indication of blatant malfeasance. |
===Timing=== | ===Timing=== | ||
Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
{{SMWDocs}} | {{SMWDocs}} | ||
+ | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{reflist}} | {{reflist}} |
Revision as of 03:44, 26 May 2014
Official narrative | |
---|---|
Interest of | Gerald Posner |
The "Official Narrative" is the cover story of "the powers that be". On WikiSpooks this generally means the story intended for citizens of the so-called 'Western Democracies'. This could be the truth, but the term is usually reserved for use in cases in which it departs significantly from the truth (which may be be unclear or completely unknown, cover by a veil of official lies). |
The Official Narrative of an event is the story told about it by the establishment.
Contents
Official Narrative
The Official Narrative about Official Narratives is that this is while not necessarily the whole truth, certainly a large part of it. While other narratives are inevitably tainted by the suspicion of self-interest, the authorities are deemed creditworthy - in the establishment's view - by their 'official' nature (and imputed trackrecord of reliability).
Problems
The official narrative, like any other narrative is a human creation, and as such may be just as susceptible to human failings, bias, lack of integrity or other such shortcoming as any personal accounts. From the "white man's burden" to "Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction", history is littered with official narratives which were abandoned either because their mendacity was exposed or simply because they had served their purpose and were no longer needed. If the official narratives of yesteryear were packed with self-serving lies, is it reasonable to expect (far less, as the establishment would have it, assume) that the official narratives of the modern day are any less mendacious?
Official narratives are sometimes changed, and are sometimes demonstrably at odds with the facts. They are often incomplete and/or inconsistant. Often they have no explicative power, and like the commercially-controlled media in general, are frequently self-referencing, facile and take a 'lowest common denominator' approach - i.e. By trivializing complex issues they fail to respect the subtleties of the matter at hand. (Who did 9/11?.. "Al-Qaeda, the evil doers". Why?... "Because they hate us." Why?... "Because we're free.").
Usage on Wikispooks
Many Wikispooks pages begin with an Official Narrative section. This reflects not a high degree of credibility in the official narrative, but rather the fact that:
- Extensive repetition by the commercially-controlled media will mean that many readers are be more familiar with this perspective than any other
- Most events have a certain number of indisputable facts which are generally[1] accounted for by the official narrative.
Often (as on this page), the official narrative section has a subsection "Problems" which highlights facts which are either not well accounted for or completely omitted by the official narrative. This serves as a starting point for the ensuing discussion, just as an introductory "Background" section often sets the scene for articles about people by giving some basic facts.
Fabrication by The Establishment
The spinning of official narratives by the establishment is a routine activity. This process is often the (completely sincere) routine work from officials who prepare press releases or public statements, later edited or soundbyted by the commercially-controlled media for their own purposes. Conscious deception is certainly invovled in some cases, but creating official narratives is not necessarily indicative of venality; the majority are probably handled routinely by employees who have this responsibility precisely because their perspectives are sufficiently limited by the regulating group mind that they can be relied upon to create establishment friendly interpretations.
Censorship
- Full article: Censorship
- Full article: Censorship
Censorship is one obvious sign of a duplicitously arrived at official narrative. For example, after it was shown on TV on September 11th, 2001, the collapse of WTC7 - in stark contrast to WTC1 & WTC2 - was not broadcast on commercially-controlled media for several years. Where a plausible official narrative can be concocted, this is generally preferred - so where censorship is evident, this is an indication of blatant malfeasance.
Timing
The speed of concoction of the official narratives is sometimes revealing. On September 11th, 2001, the 9/11 attacks were being blamed on Al-Qaeda within a couple of hours, while the BBC and Fox News notably announced the WTC7 collapse before it actually happened.
Examples
Page name | Description |
---|---|
"Discredited and disproven" | ON affirming phrase. |
9-11/Commission/Report | An official narrative crafted to deceive the ignorant, which highlights the roles of Al Qaeda and the 19 hijackers. |
9-11/Official narrative | The 9-11 plot, a false flag attack staged by the US/Deep state in concert with other deep states, was blamed on "19 hijackers" who were members of Al Qaeda. The official opposition narrative states that small scale corruption within the US government prevented the successful apprehension of the gang of 19, and also lead to some relatively minor inaccuracies and inconsistencies between the different official narratives. |
CONTEST/Prevent/Official narrative | |
File:Cass sunstein conspiracies.pdf | A classic Official Narrative-type exposition of Conspiracy theory and Conspiracy Theorists with recommendations on how governments should deal with them. It is the principal source of the now widely-used expression "Cognitive Infiltration" |
JFK/Assassination/Official narrative | |
Lockerbie Bombing/Official Narrative | The Official Narrative about the Lockerbie bombing was presented by former Lord Advocate Colin Boyd on 28 August 2001. |
The Power of Unreason | A critique and deconstruction of an 'Official Narrative'-type paper on 'Conspiracy Theory' from the 'think-tank' publisher Demos. It includes an exchange of correspondence between its authors and a Wikispooks editor which is continued on the discussion page. |
Related Quotations
Page | Quote | Author | Date |
---|---|---|---|
American Historical Association | “During the past one hundred years any theory of history or historical evidence that falls outside a pattern established by the American Historical Association and the major foundations with their grantmaking power has been attacked or rejected - not on the basis of any evidence presented, but on the basis of the acceptability of the argument to the so-called Eastern Liberal Establishment and its official historical line.” | Antony Sutton | 2002 |
Corporate media/Mendacity | “More and more we are seeing narratives about cyber-threats being used to advance reports of “attacks” and “acts of war” being perpetrated which, as far as the public is concerned, consist of nothing other than the authoritative assertions of confident-sounding media pundits. There was a recent NBC exclusive which was co-authored by Ken Dilanian, who is an actual, literal CIA asset, about the threat of hackers working for the Iranian government. The alleged Russian interference in the 2016 US elections is now routinely compared to Pearl Harbor and 9/11, despite no hard, verifiable evidence that that interference even took place ever being presented to the public.” | Caitlin Johnstone | 11 August 2018 |
Gaslighting | “This is also the model for the greater imperialist propaganda construct, not just with regard to Syria but with Russia, North Korea, Iran, and any other insolent government which refuses to bow to American supremacist agendas. It works like this: first, the oligarch-owned establishment media, which itself is chock full of Council on Foreign Relations members, uses other warmongering think tanks and its own massive funding to force deep state psyops like Russiagate and “Saddam has WMDs” into becoming the mainstream narrative. Second, they use the mainstream, widely-accepted status of this manufactured narrative to paint anyone who questions it as a mentally defective tinfoil hat-wearing conspiracy theorist. It’s a perfect scheme. The mass media has given a few elites the ability to effectively turn a false story that they themselves invented into an established fact so broadly accepted that anyone who doubts it can be painted in the exact same light as someone who doubts the roundness of the Earth. The illusion of unanimous agreement is so complete that blatant establishment psyops are placed on the same level as settled scientific fact, even though it’s made of little else but highly paid pundits making authoritative assertions in confident tones of voice day after day.” | Caitlin Johnstone | 12 February 2018 |
Truth | “After a political event of the size of JFK’s assassination or 9/11, everybody runs for cover and prepares their exculpatory narrative. ‘The truth’ doesn’t make it onto the political agenda. This is normal bureaucratic behaviour.” | Robin Ramsay |
Related Documents
Title | Type | Publication date | Author(s) | Description |
---|---|---|---|---|
Document:Pilgrims Society Address 2002 | speech | 28 November 2002 | Richard Boucher | Full of platitudes and the obligatory quotations from politicians past to bolster and confirm the essential righteousness of the Pilgrims present. Probably a fairly typical address to The London Pilgrims by a US Embassy Official, but hard to read without squirming at the delusional sanctimonious arrogance it exudes. |
Document:Pro-Kremlin trolls infiltrating comments on news sites for major influence operation, research says | Article | 6 September 2021 | Deborah Haynes | A study at Cardiff University shows that "Pro-Kremlin trolls" are influencing opinion in the West by infiltrating the comments sections of news websites. Dissent from the Official Narrative? Must be Russian disinformation. |
Document:The corporate media’s world of illusions | blog post | 11 June 2018 | Jonathan Cook | Once one is prepared to step through the door, to discard the old Great Western Narrative script, the new narrative takes its hold because it is so helpful. It actually explains the world, and human behaviour, as it is experienced everywhere. |
Rating
This provides an overview of both 'Official narratives' and 'Official opposition narratives' can be used to frame debates in ways that suit the establishment.