Hacker News Reader

Comment by yohann305 | Hacker News Reader

I saw it coming a few months ago. Didn't you? There is a group of people/organizations acting as puppet masters, dictating what's going to be the next big topic. This is a lot more scarier than the FB story itself. It would be great if someone starts digging it out and uncover what's really happening, who are they and what their motives are.

Media started feeding us stories how social networks are "bad for you", then slowly ramped up to give us the "piece de resistance": your soul (your data) has been sold to the devil.

Come on, isn't anyone else seeing it?!

ps: we have been programmed to believe this is not happening so i won't be surprised if this gets down-voted by the sheeple...

ps#2: it might not be a group or organization but just the result of a poorly built internet eco-system.

View on HN

Tactical note: If your goal is to rally the troops, it's usually good practice not to refer to people as "sheeple" or talk about down-votes.

The media decisions on "what shows up in the news" is well known, but under-reported (for obvious reasons). Whatever shows up in the news is meant to increase the value of these 6 companies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_cross-ownership_in_the_U...) and advance their CEO/boards personal agendas for the United States and world.

If you take what shows up in standard media's headlines as "what's worth talking about" you are playing their game.

> There is a group of people/organizations acting as puppet masters, dictating what's going to be the next big topic.

It’s almost like there’s a “trending news” sidebar that these shadowy people added and put in whatever they feel like and whoops we’re talking about Facebook again aren’t we?

touché! You're bringing up a good point. It might actually not be someone, but just a poorly built internet eco-system.

Implying that media is manipulated "from the top" seems needlessly complex. The perpetual urge to produce more makes the media chaotic, it can amplify any fluke in the white noise. You can manipulate the opinions while being nobody.

Why is it "needlessly complex"? Aren't all corporations "manipulated from the top"?

Because to manipulate the topic of the day, it's far easier to make a single article or interview which will then be reposted, rewritten and mixed with opinions countless times without really checking it or even critically thinking about it, than to organize a collusion with evil masterminds on top, involving huge amounts of people.

All the viral trends can be traced back to one-two sources which got picked by influential media, everybody else is talking about it because others do the same. The media always worked that way, it's nothing new, it's just more apparent in the age of hyperconnectivity.

Do you really think corporate conglomerates have no interest in PR campaigns that benefit their bottom line? It doesn't take "huge amounts of people", just a handful of board members.

Of course they do. They influence the bias by various means. They don't select particular topics. To choose the specific topic everyone is talking about today, you need just a bit more than a handful of board members though.

That's what communications and PR departments are for. It's silly to think they don't push specific topics that align with their goals, as directed by the people who pay their salaries, the board of directors.

What do you mean exactly?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com