"Revealed: Israel's curriculum for 'influencing public consciousness"

[snot]

5. Fwiw,

Cass Sunstein & Adrian Vermeule's 2008 paper recommending that government-organized sock puppets should infiltrate online forums for the purpose of manipulating public beliefs: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1068&context=public_law_and_legal_theory . Cass Sunstein later became Pres. Obama's administrator of White House Office of Information & Affairs.

Before that, under Bush II, we had the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act, which eliminated a law restricting the US gov't from propagandizing its own citizens. Also under Bush II, we had the following, spoken to journalist Ron Suskind by an aide commonly believed to have been Karl Rove:

The aide said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' [...] 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. 'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors...and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do'.

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_community ). We are immersed in "perception management" efforts from multiple PTB constituencies.

This is one reason it seems to me so important to consume news/opiniion from as many sides as possible: each constituency points out the faults of the other; the conflicts they obsess over are the things they use to to keep us too distracted and divided to use our power effectively; the things they agree on generally benefit most PTB constituencies, often at the expense of the rest of us; and the problems we notice in our own lives that PTB constituencies rarely mention are often the ones we should be most focussed on.

Any news or opinion we hear/see may or may not have face-value merit, but imho, we should frame it for ourselves in terms of what the speaker/author wants us to believe and/or be preoccupied with, and how that might benefit that speaker/author's constituency for us to believe or be preoccupied with it?