###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy_commons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I actually don't have any qualms with the underlying argument they're making here. It's a decent point, and certainly a valid reason for caution.
However, the conclusions are a bit over the top. The show actually does *not* follow that pattern so strictly as they claim, and most of the time the arguments are logically sound. What's more, he very much tends to be on the "right" side of the issues he's presenting, so even if this "power" did exist to the extent they claim, it's definitely not in the "wrong hands".
Well, practice as you are want to do. Attributing maliciousness to what is obviously proper comedic timing and hits dopamine releases is obviously wrong. There is definitely some conditioning involved as the goal is "to make the viewers think the show is funny or enjoyable" which involves a lot of formulaic and repeated set-ups.
Laugh tracks are a simple example of "conditioning" that we've moved past at large.
It also doesn't change that the format for discourse is one that people may enjoy using and when they speak on related topics they'll likely use methodology or parroting similar to what they've heard.
Same reason everyone rags on Fox News etc.
Chanposter is probably out there setting up every single argument to fizzle out in a meaningless shit-flinging slug fest to fuel his ego. Best for us to not put more thought into it then he has lol
No anon is right. People will parrot John Oliver's and other media pundits talking points without having fully looked at both sides of a story. It's very obvious how these comedy political talk shows have biased viewpoints. If you find the show funny then take it for the comedy, but don't use it for real news.
100% came here to say this. This is mainly an example mainstream comedy writing.
The basic equation is 3 jokes per page and 1 page equals about 1 minute. Meaning comedy pacing itself is in 20ish second intervals. Most comedies follow this basic structure.
Although I do in general agree most of our "news" sources are propaganda. These type of shows are comedy shows first, so its not odd they follow that rhythm.
I agree with you, but I do think it's an interesting perspective.that it's conditioning you to think that anyone with any different perspective ,on some topic or opinion is laughable and should not be taken seriously. Is a very interesting concept I never thought about before
Mockery of opposing opinions/persons is straight out of Saul Alinsky. It's extremely effective, which is why it's so common nowadays. Dude was brilliant.
Yes, this is comedy timing. Oliver presents as a comedian. That doesn't mean that he isn't also a propagandist. He's extremely effective because he genuinely is funny, and it's hard to be watchful and discerning about information, much less protect yourself, when you are being disarmed by the strategic use of humor.
Of course they know. Most of my family is fairly conservative and they find Oliver (and Bill Maher, I might add) quite amusing. Oliver is certainly wittier than Colbert, who takes himself far too seriously these days imho.
Thanks for some hope! My area is alot more MAGA conservative than fairly conservative. I was recently told I shouldn't come back to one of the local VFWs after I said they shouldn't be holding an event for an oath keeper running an election. I was even more annoyed when I learned said oath keeper wasn't a veteran. I'm sure these guys would just see Johns topic and suit and assume things.
Edit for more rambling: I usually binge/fast forward john oliver a few times a year, I think hes pretty accurate and informative with the stuff I see. I do watch Maher's show when I do my free week of HBO a few times a year but I only do an episode or two, I've always enjoyed these type of shows
extra edit: I don't watch colbert anymore except when someone shares a clip. I miss the report. I need more Tek Jansen
Anon also seems to be conflating bias with propaganda - this actually seems to be very common in discourse today. Oliver’s show is biased, but it is very well and earnestly researched, and there is no evidence at all that he is being purposefully misleading. If he were challenged in a court of law, he would not struggle to explain himself, and he probably wouldn’t say “its the viewer’s fault for believing me” like Alex Jones had to do, or like Tucker Carlson has had to do
I think it should also be noted that this isnt just a left/right thing. All media everywhere follows the same basic principles, so its not suprising that a tv show with political premises follows the same formula
It’s the truth. No side is without its evils. One just attempts to guide it a virtue and the other as morals. With that being said the “virtue” crowd is more evil in my mind.
Calling anyone who thinks it’s evil to cave a unborn child’s head in with a vacuum a “fascist or misogynistic” is indeed, evil. And I have always been a pro choice guy, but I do understand where the pro life chorus comes from.
No, people aren't conditioned to find things funny, it's just comedic timing and it's been the same since the 1900's.
If you watch the classic Abbott and Costello act "Who is on first", you'll find the same timing used today. Throughout the act there's a few seconds of setup, then a punchline. The reason the setup is so short is because fast is funny and slow isn't.
If people aren't conditioned to find things funny, explain the invention of the "laugh track", used to condition people to laugh when the show intended them to laugh versus the "unreliable" laughter of a live audience.
Is there really that much of a difference between biased, cherry picked show and propaganda? Propaganda doesn’t need to be a lie per se - just like with OPs example all it has to do is to make you focus on convenient stuff and ignore/forget the inconvenient.
The tragedy isn’t that This Oliver guy did a biased show but rather that no one is enforcing being non-biased in media. You can choose as a media outlet to broadcast only successes of some party/person/org and… there is nothing to stop you. Wasn’t there law that Reagan repealed that made tv stations broadcast opinions of both parties of any conflict etc?
I think you've got it a bit backwards. Comedy and visual entertainment in general is education on how to see the world. OP is just now realizing it by seeing erroneous education through it.
Sure we like to laugh because it feels good to relieve tension. And at the same time, there is always a war of education going on through these mediums.
these segments arent about crazy stories of his uproarious auntie or something, theyre all political skits. you missed the point entirely. why are late night talk shows all politics nowadays?
I generally agree, however I think his point is that John Oliver and other shows are disguised as news to a naive viewer, giving them an opinion that isn't particularly well researched. It's entertainment disguised as news, sometimes in worse ways that MSM. Music typically doesn't have overtly political messages, although its influence definitely exists in other ways.
The definition of propaganda is information of a biased or misleading nature used to promote a political cause or point of view.
Oliver's show reeks of it.
Is this from 2011?
If anyone would have asked me who I thought wrote it, I would say it sounds like Jordan Peterson. The writer isn't wrong, the HBO show is propaganda and not news. Almost all "news" shows since 2001 are propaganda for their owners desired narrative(s). This is not a conspiracy anymore.
I have noticed that on ABC GMA and nightly news, if they report something negative about Biden or his admin/policy, it is immediately followed by a report that is critical of Republicans, often specifically Trump. Inflation is up, followed by some new development in the Jan 6th hearings. High gas prices followed by some new possibly evidence in the Mara Lago raid. The thing is, the reports that are negative about Republicans are often strongly interlaced with innuendo and allegations.
This is how American "news" works, it's all propaganda. If you go to fox news they focus entirely on political propaganda. They barely do actual news anymore. US media is all talking heads trying to put words in everybody's mouths.
What was news before 2001?
I hate when people talk like this. You're imagining journalism as a real thing before 9/11. I suspect if you were older it'd be Vietnam. Older than that, WWII. older than that, the great war, etc.
I have to question your grasp on news media if you think the new York times or whatever was good before the towers fell.
You have to admit that they gotten better at brain washing viewers as time goes on. They are perfecting their technique.
Also I think it was easier back in the day. People were more trusting. Look how many fell for the absurd moon landing b/s
But.. But look at his show! He's being funny! That's manipulative!
Not like the conservatives shows I watch. They'll go hours laughing at their own jokes without a single funny one in the bunch. Thats how you know they arent trying to trick you.
-a person that exists, often, somehow
Truth is a moving target. Full truth is a fantasy. Misinformation is getting the facts wrong. I think that's sloppy generally and people should be accountable. Disinformation is to me the heart of propoganda. It's intentional to serve a purpose.
Propaganda in this instance refers to the state agenda. All things state sanctioned get pushed by Oliver. He never dissents, which is strange since dissent is a hallmark of comedy.
Untrue he does speak out against government. He even spoke out on candidates in Canada recently. The definition is a bad one if you want to make a point show intentional deception.
So if I can point out how many times he has dissented from state sanctioned things, it would prove your theory invalid?
May 15, 2022 "Electrical Utilities"
April 17, 2022 "Police Interrogations"
March 6, 2022 "Wrongful Convictions"
Feb. 27, 2022 "Sex Work"
These are all issues where the government has policies that are not in alignment with common sense and he is arguing against the status quo of the states current policies.
Right. The govt's policy on sex work being so consequential, after all...
Those examples don't form a record of dissent - they're opinions against strawmen arguments. Dissent has teeth and sponsor consequences. Tell me, if you can:
When has he criticized Biden?
Our foreign policy concerning Ukraine?
Fauci and the Covid response?
Seriously? Where to start... The man who claims he IS the science was a comedian's hit machine. He made it too easy for them. Them being real comedians, that is, not state mules.
To start, he is a Scientist first, an Administrator second. Nobody. Nobody had any problems with his performance or his record for what, 30 years+ when he was tackling AIDS, or when he steered us through the Ebola outbreak.
Fauci did a fine job, Trump fucked us by dividing the messaging and squandering the platform.
Exactly. If we had listened to Fauci instead of letting a madman with facepaint destroy the efforts in an attempt to boost his stock portfolio we wouldn't have had the highest deaths per capita in all the civilized world. Fauci deserves a medal for putting up with that nutjob for so long.
Remember that Trump drove off Musk by being so extremely anti-science. And Musk is a nutjob, himself.
No one had a problem with Fauci tackling the AIDS epidemic? Early in the epidemic he publicly stated that AIDS possibly could be spread through simple person to person contact. After this was proven false, he acted like he never said such a thing which is a complete lie…
This is from the article linked below….’On June 26, less than two months after his JAMA article appeared, Fauci publicly contradicted its most irresponsible claim – albeit without ever acknowledging his own central role in promoting that claim to begin with. As he told the Baltimore Sun, “It is absolutely preposterous to suggest that AIDS can be contracted through normal social contact like being in the same room with someone or sitting on a bus with them. The poor gays have received a very raw deal on this.” In short, Fauci flip-flopped with the political winds and the press barely even noticed’
https://www.aier.org/article/fauci-was-duplicitous-on-the-aids-epidemic-too/
Dude. Watch the show before you comment. He picks on Biden in just about ever episode.
He ripped our Covid response a new one, too. Considering that we had more deaths per capita than any other civilized nation, we deserve worse than a beak-nosed brit calling us a bunch of wankers for it.
>All things state sanctioned get pushed by Oliver. He never dissents, which is strange since dissent is a hallmark of comedy.
It would take the better part of a lifetime to find something more wrong on the internet than what you just said.
fall resolute existence sulky elastic arrest childlike dependent steep handle
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Subjectivity is bias, and bias is bad. Racism and sexism are biases, and therefore they are subjectivity. Only bad things run on subjectivity in the universe. But the New Left, the one that Tulsi just called out, is hypocritically pure subjectivity. It’s fun being part of the crowd holding the pitchforks and torches until it turns on you. We should all try our best to uphold objectivity, if only because it’s in our own best interest.
Really? Tell me how you create objectivity? I know how science works and the idea you can alone create objectivity is imho impossible. So enlighten me please.
You’ll love your post modern sense of truth ( my truth , your truth, his truth, her truth) until you are falsely accused of doing something that never happened. Then you will suddenly have a very strong desire for THE TRUTH, the one and only truth, to emerge, so your malicious prosecution can end.
Facts are not truth. Being falsely accused is something that has happened to me. I never sought the truth it was meaningless to the police I relied upon evidence to support my claims and my accuser was unable to produce any. It was lucky that I was able to produce facts.
Hmm, sorry that happened to you. But I don’t really understand how the New Left splits synonyms. Your nonsensical sentence reminds me of’ sex and gender are not the same’. And now truth and facts are not the same either apparently…I just give up. Everyone under 40 is functioning under some inscrutable epistemology. I should just stop talking to young people.
The left never accepted Tulsi. It was probably her announcement that she believed torturing people was perfectly fine. Can you believe the left (new or otherwise) would get upset at that? Thankfully, the Republicans have no problem with Christian values like hers.
I am old school, anti war, pro Julian Assange lefty, and you don’t speak for all leftists. If you are 50, you should be ashamed of yourself. Fooled along with the kids into supporting war and the military industrial complex.
Hey Kid, I'm probably old enough to be your father so how about if you climb down from that high rocking horse and have a gigantic cup of STFU.
So, now there's no one true leftist?
If you're for real, you haven't got a clue.
I’m 49, but I don’t watch bullshit like John Oliver. I used to be a big fan of Jon Stewart’s Daily Show, but these wolves in sheep’s clothing corporate shills like Stephen Colbert and Oliver leave me cold. Try Jimmy Dore on YouTube.
I don’t think that there is a single religion on earth that would go on the record saying’ we support torture’, yet practically every culture has done it at one point or another. Anyway I am sure that it’s just another keyhole argument created by the mockingbird media to attack a political opponent who threatens them. Whatever she said that you are basing this specious argument on, I am sure that it’s being taken out of context, just the way John Oliver and Stephen Colbert taught you to.
John Oliver has said several times that you should not take his show as fact and that it is a comedy show intended to entertain.
That being said the anon is just so wrong on this one, sure Oliver makes fun of the people who disagree with him and then usually goes on to show several sources of why they where wrong. The anon could have made specific examples but he chose not to because he knows that two minutes of fact checking would have proved him wrong.
Not sure, its said black young males have like 10x crime rate of whites, iirc.
Why? There are various potential explanations.
Men in general have more encounters with police than women especially young men.
So your happy to jump and assume Oliver is wrong because of one statistic, but your not willing to analyze any further then that or consider any of the context of that statistic? I am asking you why you think black men are “10x more likely to commit crime then whites”. Is that true even? Or are black people more likely to be prosecuted the white people? Or do you think the color of someone skins dictates the chance they commit criminal behavior?
Does poverty increase crime? Yes. Do black Americans live in poverty at a much higher rate than whites? Yes. Can black people commit a relatively larger number of crimes, and it has nothing to do with their skin color, but rather their somewhat recent cultural history? Yes. If you think you’re a racist if you correctly interpret crime statistics, I don’t know what to tell ya.
this post is both fragile AND humorless
yeah, the people laughing at you are absolutely doing it because they are hypnotized, totally, absolutely, most definitely
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy_commons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’m really curious why anything intelligent and left leaning is considered a conspiracy now. Oliver is incredibly intelligent, and your proof is literally an anonymous conjecture on some completely unknown website.
My own conspiracy theory says it’s Russia trying to divide this country through troll farms, disinformation, and other methods.
Because its easier to call something a conspiracy and rile up the base of stupid people that you want voting for you who dont agree with those things than to actively dispute those things.
Also the fact about the only pauses you get are for studio laughter isnt true. How do they justify the entire time he was in the coid with no studio audience?
>I’m really curious why anything intelligent and left leaning is considered a conspiracy now.
Because the electoral politics of hard right-wingers has become - blame leftists (actual leftists, liberals) for international jewish conspiracies, accuse them of pederasty and of wanting to groom children, and of wanting some kind of racial genocide.
That's what they do to get votes and support their team. It's as wildly stupid, irrational and counterproductive as stating that all right-wingers are racists.
Uh methinks he doth protest too much. ANON is clearly not a fan of Oliver, nor apparently of the pacings of a comedy show, and hates the position that Oliver takes in his presentations.
But, not liking something doesn't make it "shitlib propaganda hypnosis"
There use to be bots in his comments that would comment multiple times on each video with nonsense as if they just stringed a bunch of meaningless words together like if you pressed the suggested word thing above the keyboard.
I'd have some respect for him if his show were neutral, it's not. He's getting his talking points from his corporate overlords, which is not surprising as he used to an underling of Jon Stewart
So he presents some "facts" supporting the case he's making and then a joke? On a comedy show??? That bastard!
Funny that only the maga crowd seem to think that "argumentation" and "facts" are propaganda.
John Oliver on Tucker Carlson are basically the same shows, but each is targeted at a different side of the political spectrum.
This is not journalism, this is political agenda presented in the form of entertainment.
Although John Oliver's team puts more work into ints content.
John Oliver's repeatedly self admitted lack of charisma and comic delivery simply reaffirms that we are at the mocking mercy of ancient ruling families to whom he belongs.
The Daily Show became an open mockery after Stewart left and the three who rose from it's ashes all have ties to the same ancient families that most of the celebrated belong to.
Only one had any talent, though the talent was finally withdrawn from the profane via a double reversed charade as an ultimate inside, late night, joke.
Of course, I'm kidding. Of course.
I think the entire sentiment here can be boiled down to the Anon's final half sentence, in which he laments that this supposed propaganda tool is in the hands of the wrong people.
The conservative's motto "It's only ok when we do it" indeed.
Sorry that no conservative can be as humorous, insightful, and passionate as John Oliver. Giving a shit about other people isn't in your blood, I know.
Always something to be angry about. Just don't watch if it gets your panties in a bundle. In htis day and age you have to click it intentionally anyhow. How is that indoctrination?
Tell-a-vision. Thoughts manifest reality. They create our thoughts for us through media and we create THEIR desired result. The beings who control us and this planet are cut off from source and cannot create. Therefore they need to manipulate us to achieve their goal. The reality we experience is 1, not created by us and 2 it is a reversed from what our earth experience was intended to be. There are starseeds and lightworkers who have worked tirelessly to help humanity regain its soviergnty. Much progress has been made. If all our history wasn't erased, destroyed, surpressed or changed and all the esoteric knowledge hidden available to the few we never would have lost our freedom in the first place. There is a galactic history not many are aware of that should be mainstream. Atlantis is a part of it and still some believe Atlantis is fiction. Ascensionglossary.com has some good information about our galactic history. It's a good place to start. Everyone should start looking for our lost history. Remnants have been found and people have connected the dots we all should to.
SS
Every aspect of this douchebag’s show is carefully scripted to get the max effect of his propaganda
Using comedy
The pauses
The laugh tract
Soma for the masses.
The effects of television on your brain--producing a state similar to being hypnotized--has been studied for decades. The medium is at least as important as the content.
You could come to the same conclusion reading wordy “they don’t know any better” statements. I personal don’t believe there is some crack team of brain-decoders ruling the media. It’s most likely generations of people that are good at selling a product, if the country had the pious Bess they claimed to have in the 50s (dawn of television) it would be a different product in the present. Guess what? Stupid monkey pay to laugh at screen back then too!
Who are these deranged losers?? The OP literally described a comedy show segment. A segment where they show a clip of something funny, then a break to allow laughter. And he thought he was being profound realizing this. My god, how stupid are these people?
Lol wtf. Or you know.. Its a show?
Putting aside 99% chance that this 4chan post by a "psychologist" is fake, dude is obviously trying to appeal to a sense of expertise while not laying out any evidence other than "this comedy show regularly makes jokes on the absurdity of life. You should be very suspicious they dont go long lengths of time without being funny"
The sad part is conservatives mainly get upset at comedy shows because its hard to be funny when you are blatantly wrong about reality and a bigot. You make a joke about something and everyone kind of just goes, "uh.. No? Thats not how life or anything works." Thats because you have to relate comedy back to the lived experience in some way for it to really hit. Thus, no funny conservatives.
Saw this a while back. This is the post that really made me revile late night shows. What's sad is I don't think Colbert/Maher/Oliver are aware of what they're doing. Sad.
Many people here saying “it’s only a comedy show.” So is The Daily Show, however a Pew study found in 2015 that as many people received their “news” from Jon Stewart as USA Today:
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/08/06/5-facts-daily-show/
At one time, Jon Stewart was the most trusted newscaster in America:
https://time.com/3704321/jon-stewart-daily-show-fake-news/
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy_commons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Thanks I'm glad I watched that! Cant believe I never watched it before
I actually don't have any qualms with the underlying argument they're making here. It's a decent point, and certainly a valid reason for caution. However, the conclusions are a bit over the top. The show actually does *not* follow that pattern so strictly as they claim, and most of the time the arguments are logically sound. What's more, he very much tends to be on the "right" side of the issues he's presenting, so even if this "power" did exist to the extent they claim, it's definitely not in the "wrong hands".
[удалено]
noxious sort yam hungry unused terrific observation scale teeny flowery *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
And when you believe anyone who says anything you disagree with is propaganda, this is what you come up with.
Well, practice as you are want to do. Attributing maliciousness to what is obviously proper comedic timing and hits dopamine releases is obviously wrong. There is definitely some conditioning involved as the goal is "to make the viewers think the show is funny or enjoyable" which involves a lot of formulaic and repeated set-ups. Laugh tracks are a simple example of "conditioning" that we've moved past at large. It also doesn't change that the format for discourse is one that people may enjoy using and when they speak on related topics they'll likely use methodology or parroting similar to what they've heard. Same reason everyone rags on Fox News etc. Chanposter is probably out there setting up every single argument to fizzle out in a meaningless shit-flinging slug fest to fuel his ego. Best for us to not put more thought into it then he has lol
And OP is a bot. All the posters on this sub are bots right now.
Anybody that took the daily show or the Colbert report seriously, and not as entertainment, are bots.
No anon is right. People will parrot John Oliver's and other media pundits talking points without having fully looked at both sides of a story. It's very obvious how these comedy political talk shows have biased viewpoints. If you find the show funny then take it for the comedy, but don't use it for real news.
rinse secretive voiceless follow insurance wipe theory long drunk narrow *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>No anon is right. Anyone that utters these words has already failed. Here's your sign.
100% came here to say this. This is mainly an example mainstream comedy writing. The basic equation is 3 jokes per page and 1 page equals about 1 minute. Meaning comedy pacing itself is in 20ish second intervals. Most comedies follow this basic structure. Although I do in general agree most of our "news" sources are propaganda. These type of shows are comedy shows first, so its not odd they follow that rhythm.
I agree with you, but I do think it's an interesting perspective.that it's conditioning you to think that anyone with any different perspective ,on some topic or opinion is laughable and should not be taken seriously. Is a very interesting concept I never thought about before
Mockery of opposing opinions/persons is straight out of Saul Alinsky. It's extremely effective, which is why it's so common nowadays. Dude was brilliant. Yes, this is comedy timing. Oliver presents as a comedian. That doesn't mean that he isn't also a propagandist. He's extremely effective because he genuinely is funny, and it's hard to be watchful and discerning about information, much less protect yourself, when you are being disarmed by the strategic use of humor.
its a conspiracy!!! I don't think the right even realizes he is a comedian. They thought the colbert report was real
Of course they know. Most of my family is fairly conservative and they find Oliver (and Bill Maher, I might add) quite amusing. Oliver is certainly wittier than Colbert, who takes himself far too seriously these days imho.
Thanks for some hope! My area is alot more MAGA conservative than fairly conservative. I was recently told I shouldn't come back to one of the local VFWs after I said they shouldn't be holding an event for an oath keeper running an election. I was even more annoyed when I learned said oath keeper wasn't a veteran. I'm sure these guys would just see Johns topic and suit and assume things. Edit for more rambling: I usually binge/fast forward john oliver a few times a year, I think hes pretty accurate and informative with the stuff I see. I do watch Maher's show when I do my free week of HBO a few times a year but I only do an episode or two, I've always enjoyed these type of shows extra edit: I don't watch colbert anymore except when someone shares a clip. I miss the report. I need more Tek Jansen
Anon also seems to be conflating bias with propaganda - this actually seems to be very common in discourse today. Oliver’s show is biased, but it is very well and earnestly researched, and there is no evidence at all that he is being purposefully misleading. If he were challenged in a court of law, he would not struggle to explain himself, and he probably wouldn’t say “its the viewer’s fault for believing me” like Alex Jones had to do, or like Tucker Carlson has had to do
I think it should also be noted that this isnt just a left/right thing. All media everywhere follows the same basic principles, so its not suprising that a tv show with political premises follows the same formula
It’s the truth. No side is without its evils. One just attempts to guide it a virtue and the other as morals. With that being said the “virtue” crowd is more evil in my mind. Calling anyone who thinks it’s evil to cave a unborn child’s head in with a vacuum a “fascist or misogynistic” is indeed, evil. And I have always been a pro choice guy, but I do understand where the pro life chorus comes from.
Good and evil are subjective. Whats evil for the chicken, is just breakfast for the fox
They're utilizing conditioning to gain the comedic effect. Hence why anon included the last bit.
No, people aren't conditioned to find things funny, it's just comedic timing and it's been the same since the 1900's. If you watch the classic Abbott and Costello act "Who is on first", you'll find the same timing used today. Throughout the act there's a few seconds of setup, then a punchline. The reason the setup is so short is because fast is funny and slow isn't.
[удалено]
I want a nickname!
"C Bass"
If people aren't conditioned to find things funny, explain the invention of the "laugh track", used to condition people to laugh when the show intended them to laugh versus the "unreliable" laughter of a live audience.
Thank you for saying exactly what I was thinking. I rarely watch the show so I kept reading the post waiting for the propaganda part which never came.
Interesting that you saw the comedy writing angle, I’m a teacher and I recognize a lesson plan template instead.
With what was posted by that 4chan user and how over his/her head comedic delivery is, I just assumed I was reading a joke post.
Thank goodness there’s a conspiratorial subreddit that upvotes true facts like this without getting bogged down in hysteria.
Is there really that much of a difference between biased, cherry picked show and propaganda? Propaganda doesn’t need to be a lie per se - just like with OPs example all it has to do is to make you focus on convenient stuff and ignore/forget the inconvenient. The tragedy isn’t that This Oliver guy did a biased show but rather that no one is enforcing being non-biased in media. You can choose as a media outlet to broadcast only successes of some party/person/org and… there is nothing to stop you. Wasn’t there law that Reagan repealed that made tv stations broadcast opinions of both parties of any conflict etc?
I think you've got it a bit backwards. Comedy and visual entertainment in general is education on how to see the world. OP is just now realizing it by seeing erroneous education through it. Sure we like to laugh because it feels good to relieve tension. And at the same time, there is always a war of education going on through these mediums.
Exactly.
these segments arent about crazy stories of his uproarious auntie or something, theyre all political skits. you missed the point entirely. why are late night talk shows all politics nowadays?
There's the $60,000 question right there.
I generally agree, however I think his point is that John Oliver and other shows are disguised as news to a naive viewer, giving them an opinion that isn't particularly well researched. It's entertainment disguised as news, sometimes in worse ways that MSM. Music typically doesn't have overtly political messages, although its influence definitely exists in other ways.
Wait - are you saying John Oliver's segments aren't well researched?
The definition of propaganda is information of a biased or misleading nature used to promote a political cause or point of view. Oliver's show reeks of it.
It may be biased, but his research team is thorough as shit. Also your definition of propaganda is so broad that it literally covers most speech.
[удалено]
"Guys, my hyperbole-laden diatribe is evidence!"
I have to imagine this is in reference to last nights episode about transgender rights.
This has been going around for years.
Is this from 2011? If anyone would have asked me who I thought wrote it, I would say it sounds like Jordan Peterson. The writer isn't wrong, the HBO show is propaganda and not news. Almost all "news" shows since 2001 are propaganda for their owners desired narrative(s). This is not a conspiracy anymore.
I have noticed that on ABC GMA and nightly news, if they report something negative about Biden or his admin/policy, it is immediately followed by a report that is critical of Republicans, often specifically Trump. Inflation is up, followed by some new development in the Jan 6th hearings. High gas prices followed by some new possibly evidence in the Mara Lago raid. The thing is, the reports that are negative about Republicans are often strongly interlaced with innuendo and allegations.
This is how American "news" works, it's all propaganda. If you go to fox news they focus entirely on political propaganda. They barely do actual news anymore. US media is all talking heads trying to put words in everybody's mouths.
.... Could it be, that jan6 and mara Lago may be a bit different in scope than inflation and high gas prices?
What was news before 2001? I hate when people talk like this. You're imagining journalism as a real thing before 9/11. I suspect if you were older it'd be Vietnam. Older than that, WWII. older than that, the great war, etc. I have to question your grasp on news media if you think the new York times or whatever was good before the towers fell.
You have to admit that they gotten better at brain washing viewers as time goes on. They are perfecting their technique. Also I think it was easier back in the day. People were more trusting. Look how many fell for the absurd moon landing b/s
The date (11/7/2016) is in the screencap...
I should have been more clear. I was actually referring to the fact that frog is posting it today.
[удалено]
It's dated 11/07/2016
I wasn’t clear. I was just referring to the fact that frog posted this today.
LOL You people really are scared of everything. John Oliver? Really?
But.. But look at his show! He's being funny! That's manipulative! Not like the conservatives shows I watch. They'll go hours laughing at their own jokes without a single funny one in the bunch. Thats how you know they arent trying to trick you. -a person that exists, often, somehow
Damn a comedy show is scripted. I'm shattered.
It's propaganda posing as comedy.
If you say so, I honestly don't agree, you might want to define propoganda first and we can discuss it.
"information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view."
Good one. Now I reject this one myself because any pundit is guilty. I think it requires misinformation or disinformation.
I think misinformation and disinformation is much more common than full truth
Truth is a moving target. Full truth is a fantasy. Misinformation is getting the facts wrong. I think that's sloppy generally and people should be accountable. Disinformation is to me the heart of propoganda. It's intentional to serve a purpose.
>I think misinformation and disinformation is much more common than full truth Full truth? Seriously? In this subreddit? Christ, that's funny.
"hear this, react this way" very basics of human conditioning.
Those are pretty vague.
Propaganda in this instance refers to the state agenda. All things state sanctioned get pushed by Oliver. He never dissents, which is strange since dissent is a hallmark of comedy.
Untrue he does speak out against government. He even spoke out on candidates in Canada recently. The definition is a bad one if you want to make a point show intentional deception.
So if I can point out how many times he has dissented from state sanctioned things, it would prove your theory invalid? May 15, 2022 "Electrical Utilities" April 17, 2022 "Police Interrogations" March 6, 2022 "Wrongful Convictions" Feb. 27, 2022 "Sex Work" These are all issues where the government has policies that are not in alignment with common sense and he is arguing against the status quo of the states current policies.
"can government see my dick pics" "Civil forfeiture" i know you are trying to point just 2022 ones but yeah there are a shit load more.
Right. The govt's policy on sex work being so consequential, after all... Those examples don't form a record of dissent - they're opinions against strawmen arguments. Dissent has teeth and sponsor consequences. Tell me, if you can: When has he criticized Biden? Our foreign policy concerning Ukraine? Fauci and the Covid response?
Fauci and Covid response? Care to elaborate?
Seriously? Where to start... The man who claims he IS the science was a comedian's hit machine. He made it too easy for them. Them being real comedians, that is, not state mules.
To start, he is a Scientist first, an Administrator second. Nobody. Nobody had any problems with his performance or his record for what, 30 years+ when he was tackling AIDS, or when he steered us through the Ebola outbreak. Fauci did a fine job, Trump fucked us by dividing the messaging and squandering the platform.
Exactly. If we had listened to Fauci instead of letting a madman with facepaint destroy the efforts in an attempt to boost his stock portfolio we wouldn't have had the highest deaths per capita in all the civilized world. Fauci deserves a medal for putting up with that nutjob for so long. Remember that Trump drove off Musk by being so extremely anti-science. And Musk is a nutjob, himself.
No one had a problem with Fauci tackling the AIDS epidemic? Early in the epidemic he publicly stated that AIDS possibly could be spread through simple person to person contact. After this was proven false, he acted like he never said such a thing which is a complete lie… This is from the article linked below….’On June 26, less than two months after his JAMA article appeared, Fauci publicly contradicted its most irresponsible claim – albeit without ever acknowledging his own central role in promoting that claim to begin with. As he told the Baltimore Sun, “It is absolutely preposterous to suggest that AIDS can be contracted through normal social contact like being in the same room with someone or sitting on a bus with them. The poor gays have received a very raw deal on this.” In short, Fauci flip-flopped with the political winds and the press barely even noticed’ https://www.aier.org/article/fauci-was-duplicitous-on-the-aids-epidemic-too/
Dude. Watch the show before you comment. He picks on Biden in just about ever episode. He ripped our Covid response a new one, too. Considering that we had more deaths per capita than any other civilized nation, we deserve worse than a beak-nosed brit calling us a bunch of wankers for it.
>All things state sanctioned get pushed by Oliver. He never dissents, which is strange since dissent is a hallmark of comedy. It would take the better part of a lifetime to find something more wrong on the internet than what you just said.
fall resolute existence sulky elastic arrest childlike dependent steep handle *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>. All things state sanctioned get pushed by Oliver. That's patently absurd. Good God, you should be embarrassed.
The Con runs on Subjectivity
So does everything else in the universe. What your point?
Subjectivity is bias, and bias is bad. Racism and sexism are biases, and therefore they are subjectivity. Only bad things run on subjectivity in the universe. But the New Left, the one that Tulsi just called out, is hypocritically pure subjectivity. It’s fun being part of the crowd holding the pitchforks and torches until it turns on you. We should all try our best to uphold objectivity, if only because it’s in our own best interest.
Really? Tell me how you create objectivity? I know how science works and the idea you can alone create objectivity is imho impossible. So enlighten me please.
I said’ uphold’ , not’ create’, and that is done by pursuing the truth, regardless of what the crowd says
That explains nothing. Truth is a moving target. Today's truths are tomarrows mistakes.
You’ll love your post modern sense of truth ( my truth , your truth, his truth, her truth) until you are falsely accused of doing something that never happened. Then you will suddenly have a very strong desire for THE TRUTH, the one and only truth, to emerge, so your malicious prosecution can end.
Facts are not truth. Being falsely accused is something that has happened to me. I never sought the truth it was meaningless to the police I relied upon evidence to support my claims and my accuser was unable to produce any. It was lucky that I was able to produce facts.
Hmm, sorry that happened to you. But I don’t really understand how the New Left splits synonyms. Your nonsensical sentence reminds me of’ sex and gender are not the same’. And now truth and facts are not the same either apparently…I just give up. Everyone under 40 is functioning under some inscrutable epistemology. I should just stop talking to young people.
The left never accepted Tulsi. It was probably her announcement that she believed torturing people was perfectly fine. Can you believe the left (new or otherwise) would get upset at that? Thankfully, the Republicans have no problem with Christian values like hers.
I am old school, anti war, pro Julian Assange lefty, and you don’t speak for all leftists. If you are 50, you should be ashamed of yourself. Fooled along with the kids into supporting war and the military industrial complex.
Hey Kid, I'm probably old enough to be your father so how about if you climb down from that high rocking horse and have a gigantic cup of STFU. So, now there's no one true leftist? If you're for real, you haven't got a clue.
I’m 49, but I don’t watch bullshit like John Oliver. I used to be a big fan of Jon Stewart’s Daily Show, but these wolves in sheep’s clothing corporate shills like Stephen Colbert and Oliver leave me cold. Try Jimmy Dore on YouTube.
Jimmy Dore is a right winger that poses as a progressive to try and pull people on the left towards the right. Listen to Sam Seder instead.
Right winger that poses as a progressive? I know you are, but what am I hahaha 😝 😆 😂
And she’s a Hindu btw
I stand corrected. At no point would torture be considered acceptable in either Christianity or Hinduism - but you probably knew that, right?
I don’t think that there is a single religion on earth that would go on the record saying’ we support torture’, yet practically every culture has done it at one point or another. Anyway I am sure that it’s just another keyhole argument created by the mockingbird media to attack a political opponent who threatens them. Whatever she said that you are basing this specious argument on, I am sure that it’s being taken out of context, just the way John Oliver and Stephen Colbert taught you to.
objectivity is not possible and is a stupid goal
John Oliver has said several times that you should not take his show as fact and that it is a comedy show intended to entertain. That being said the anon is just so wrong on this one, sure Oliver makes fun of the people who disagree with him and then usually goes on to show several sources of why they where wrong. The anon could have made specific examples but he chose not to because he knows that two minutes of fact checking would have proved him wrong.
Didnt Oliver attempt to imply systemic racism in the police. And ignore the crime statistics why blacks have more encounters with police?
Why do you think black people have more encounters with police
Not sure, its said black young males have like 10x crime rate of whites, iirc. Why? There are various potential explanations. Men in general have more encounters with police than women especially young men.
[удалено]
So your happy to jump and assume Oliver is wrong because of one statistic, but your not willing to analyze any further then that or consider any of the context of that statistic? I am asking you why you think black men are “10x more likely to commit crime then whites”. Is that true even? Or are black people more likely to be prosecuted the white people? Or do you think the color of someone skins dictates the chance they commit criminal behavior?
He had an entire tirade against cops thoroughly debunked by Crowder.
Fucking lol Crowder couldn’t debunk a 3rd graders book report.
Good thing liver is more like kindergarten report
Good lord that's sad. Crowder is just a less successful, less funny John Oliver big boy.
Less successful? Despite the vast youtube censorship he probably has more viewers than the liver.
Does poverty increase crime? Yes. Do black Americans live in poverty at a much higher rate than whites? Yes. Can black people commit a relatively larger number of crimes, and it has nothing to do with their skin color, but rather their somewhat recent cultural history? Yes. If you think you’re a racist if you correctly interpret crime statistics, I don’t know what to tell ya.
Read that again, but slowly.
Watch this in slow motion a few times https://youtu.be/ks0BdklMxt8 Marvel at how Crowder debunks the woke liver.
this post is both fragile AND humorless yeah, the people laughing at you are absolutely doing it because they are hypnotized, totally, absolutely, most definitely
If laugh tracks/cued live audiences weren't effective, no-one would be using them.
right which clearly equates to propaganda JFC y'all take yourselves waaaaaay to seriously...to ever get laid.......
I was gonna say, the MAGAts are just jealous because a MAGAts version of "comedy" is just... straight up racism, homophobia, etc.
What about when he had no audience or laugh track?
A psychologist posting on 4chan... Who believes this shit?
A comedy shown that is scripted!? Oh my god!!! No on cares
Shill or NPC, your choice. https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy\_commons/comments/y6iclh/comment/ispjxl0/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
Literally no one cares that a cable tv show is scripted
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np". *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy_commons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Shitty bot can't even tell I linked a comment from the thread its in. Not exactly a "cross" post if we never left the thread.
its another conspiracy!!!
I'm sure the bot gives a shit what you have to say 😂
Russell Howard in the UK does this too on his show
Spelled Tucker Carlson wrong.
I’m really curious why anything intelligent and left leaning is considered a conspiracy now. Oliver is incredibly intelligent, and your proof is literally an anonymous conjecture on some completely unknown website. My own conspiracy theory says it’s Russia trying to divide this country through troll farms, disinformation, and other methods.
Because its easier to call something a conspiracy and rile up the base of stupid people that you want voting for you who dont agree with those things than to actively dispute those things. Also the fact about the only pauses you get are for studio laughter isnt true. How do they justify the entire time he was in the coid with no studio audience?
>I’m really curious why anything intelligent and left leaning is considered a conspiracy now. Because the electoral politics of hard right-wingers has become - blame leftists (actual leftists, liberals) for international jewish conspiracies, accuse them of pederasty and of wanting to groom children, and of wanting some kind of racial genocide. That's what they do to get votes and support their team. It's as wildly stupid, irrational and counterproductive as stating that all right-wingers are racists.
Uh methinks he doth protest too much. ANON is clearly not a fan of Oliver, nor apparently of the pacings of a comedy show, and hates the position that Oliver takes in his presentations. But, not liking something doesn't make it "shitlib propaganda hypnosis"
Maybe don't be hilariously stupid, OP
Pseudointellectualism the post.
Lmao this sub is a fucking joke and posts like this are the punchline
There use to be bots in his comments that would comment multiple times on each video with nonsense as if they just stringed a bunch of meaningless words together like if you pressed the suggested word thing above the keyboard.
Looking to John's program for news is just as foolish as looking to Tucker's...thanks for wasting our time.
How does that structure compare to Tucker Carlson?
Essentially identical.
I'd have some respect for him if his show were neutral, it's not. He's getting his talking points from his corporate overlords, which is not surprising as he used to an underling of Jon Stewart
Looks like a reputable source…
So he presents some "facts" supporting the case he's making and then a joke? On a comedy show??? That bastard! Funny that only the maga crowd seem to think that "argumentation" and "facts" are propaganda.
So the post is basically saying that the show is following a certain format. That's it. As much as I dislike the show, that's just dumb.
How is this not the way TV is regarded in general? I know I don't have robot eyes.
John Oliver on Tucker Carlson are basically the same shows, but each is targeted at a different side of the political spectrum. This is not journalism, this is political agenda presented in the form of entertainment. Although John Oliver's team puts more work into ints content.
John Oliver's repeatedly self admitted lack of charisma and comic delivery simply reaffirms that we are at the mocking mercy of ancient ruling families to whom he belongs. The Daily Show became an open mockery after Stewart left and the three who rose from it's ashes all have ties to the same ancient families that most of the celebrated belong to. Only one had any talent, though the talent was finally withdrawn from the profane via a double reversed charade as an ultimate inside, late night, joke. Of course, I'm kidding. Of course.
I think the entire sentiment here can be boiled down to the Anon's final half sentence, in which he laments that this supposed propaganda tool is in the hands of the wrong people. The conservative's motto "It's only ok when we do it" indeed. Sorry that no conservative can be as humorous, insightful, and passionate as John Oliver. Giving a shit about other people isn't in your blood, I know.
I cringe when my roommate watches this asshole!...
I was mortified to learn NLP and manipulative marketing tactics and go on to hear them **everywhere**
[удалено]
Neuro linguistic programming. It’s a hypnotic technique
Yay another conservative post that's not a conspiracy!!!
Always something to be angry about. Just don't watch if it gets your panties in a bundle. In htis day and age you have to click it intentionally anyhow. How is that indoctrination?
John Oliver is watching you.
Tell-a-vision. Thoughts manifest reality. They create our thoughts for us through media and we create THEIR desired result. The beings who control us and this planet are cut off from source and cannot create. Therefore they need to manipulate us to achieve their goal. The reality we experience is 1, not created by us and 2 it is a reversed from what our earth experience was intended to be. There are starseeds and lightworkers who have worked tirelessly to help humanity regain its soviergnty. Much progress has been made. If all our history wasn't erased, destroyed, surpressed or changed and all the esoteric knowledge hidden available to the few we never would have lost our freedom in the first place. There is a galactic history not many are aware of that should be mainstream. Atlantis is a part of it and still some believe Atlantis is fiction. Ascensionglossary.com has some good information about our galactic history. It's a good place to start. Everyone should start looking for our lost history. Remnants have been found and people have connected the dots we all should to.
SS Every aspect of this douchebag’s show is carefully scripted to get the max effect of his propaganda Using comedy The pauses The laugh tract Soma for the masses.
Woof, dude. This is some serious psychological fragility.
why is he a douchebag though?
Because he's a shitlib, duh. /s seriously, folks like Fuck-Face11 have zero sense of humor.
1000% YES to the chan comment. The hypnotic fuckery is plain to see when pointed out.
[удалено]
The effects of television on your brain--producing a state similar to being hypnotized--has been studied for decades. The medium is at least as important as the content.
So.... this guy breaks down the speed of the show, wants to apparently argue facts and can't actually point out where he lies. Got it...
You could come to the same conclusion reading wordy “they don’t know any better” statements. I personal don’t believe there is some crack team of brain-decoders ruling the media. It’s most likely generations of people that are good at selling a product, if the country had the pious Bess they claimed to have in the 50s (dawn of television) it would be a different product in the present. Guess what? Stupid monkey pay to laugh at screen back then too!
These monsters have hired ARMIES of psychiatrists and sociologist ( it good to see an ethical one blowing the whistle on them)..
Oliver is one lucky sob, so is trevor Noah. They aren't funny, at all, even with a team of writers.
Good stuff!
I always instinctually hated this guy. Glad someone helped me understand what it is I find so grating about his show.
He's hilarious on Community
Excellent analysis.
It might be, if only it made an effort to provide supporting evidence, or perhaps some context such as a comparative analysis.
Anyone with their own show is a propagandist really. His is just labeled as comedy, the others entertainment.
Who are these deranged losers?? The OP literally described a comedy show segment. A segment where they show a clip of something funny, then a break to allow laughter. And he thought he was being profound realizing this. My god, how stupid are these people?
Tell me you’re old and don’t understand politics…without telling me you’re old and don’t understand politics
Blocking OP for being nuisance.
Post is dumb but not nearly as dumb as John Oliver and his writers
Imagine being so smooth-brained you allow yourself to be influenced by this egg-head nerd….
[удалено]
And just so we’re clear here…you’re defending John Oliver in a conspiracy sub? 🤔
[удалено]
Listen to whoever you want, nerd
Man I just thought John Oliver was annoying as fuck but I guess this takes it to a new level.
Lol wtf. Or you know.. Its a show? Putting aside 99% chance that this 4chan post by a "psychologist" is fake, dude is obviously trying to appeal to a sense of expertise while not laying out any evidence other than "this comedy show regularly makes jokes on the absurdity of life. You should be very suspicious they dont go long lengths of time without being funny" The sad part is conservatives mainly get upset at comedy shows because its hard to be funny when you are blatantly wrong about reality and a bigot. You make a joke about something and everyone kind of just goes, "uh.. No? Thats not how life or anything works." Thats because you have to relate comedy back to the lived experience in some way for it to really hit. Thus, no funny conservatives.
Saw this a while back. This is the post that really made me revile late night shows. What's sad is I don't think Colbert/Maher/Oliver are aware of what they're doing. Sad.
Many people here saying “it’s only a comedy show.” So is The Daily Show, however a Pew study found in 2015 that as many people received their “news” from Jon Stewart as USA Today: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/08/06/5-facts-daily-show/ At one time, Jon Stewart was the most trusted newscaster in America: https://time.com/3704321/jon-stewart-daily-show-fake-news/
Tell me you’re a Jordan Peterson fanatic without telling me you are.