The purpose of this note is to evaluate some of the more conflicted elements of arrangement regarding concerns about distribution of materials that may be unethical and to limn some considerations regarding personal guidelines in disputed situations of the publishing press. Ironically, the very process of being concerned for the ethics of information may seriously abridge the ideals of the dialogue for being too brief. When critical matters are pushed to the sidelines they form fallacies due to oversight. This note is to maximize the potential of a brief concerning a paramount consideration of the publishing press: objective facts and the art of their presentation.
There is an existential story, by whom I don’t know, having been asked to read it at a get acquainted meeting with phenomenologist Paul Colaizzo of Duquesne University, in which to gain a respite from torture interrogation a member of the resistance tells Gestapo fake news concerning the whereabouts of his compatriots after settling on a place they would never go, only to be unhappily released with slaps on the back when they are found there. Fake news is messy and perverse, it fosters ignorance and does damage, but it is a potentially powerful broker. The most terrifying example I know of is the way Lee Harvey Oswald was used, but aside from that we have the incitement that led to the Rosewood massacre, and of course Orson Welles’ famous Day the Earth Stood Still broadcast and various exaggerations about that melee. Accordingly it is reasonable to ask would it be wise to criminalize? Is it protected speech? If a very rational person sees getting overwrought about flag burning as fake news because of how easy they are to replace, it is also fair to note that fake news is a common method of demanding tribute to flag-waving, using melodrama against Muslims and so on. The populism at work in other words makes what people want to believe the unhappy medium governing respected views in the press. It is hard to argue such a pendulum full circle.
With media being used as a weapon, the subtleties of discourse risk being subverted by awareness of those subtleties from persons promoting fake news. The ability to stall and take the moral high ground can be used by rhetoricians if the wise aren’t fully attuned to the wiles of propaganda. In other words, play acting the moral witness is a fine art of acting. A good example of this is what happened when John Lennon went on Tom Snyder to announce himself a genius and saying that if he went around telling children not to use drugs, they would rebelliously snipe at him, who are you? The evasion of mentorship and role modeling is an important feature of life in a media that worships a man who said that nothing is real. Further, the power structures in the University have included at least one sophisticated Nuclear strategist, James W. Child, whose theory of civil conflict revolved around the idea of not teaching the young what they needed to know and then when they behaved in a confused way intercept them with war games that constituted playing by their own perceived rulebook. This was a very shrewd fetish of entanglements that emerged from Warhol Foundation in Lennon’s name. This is from the mind of someone invalidating themselves at everyone else’s expense. If you don’t want to suspect Trump, fine.
To avoid this tragedy’s repetition there are strategies that educators could follow as reform. One example is to teach the use of qualifiers and how to use them appropriately and responsibly. Some examples follow:
...perhaps…
...the reason this cannot be ruled out…
...there are other explanations which would appear to have more merit…
...this can be viewed both honestly and deceptively…
...in my opinion…
During my own investigation into the origin of AIDS I faced a rulebook from Britain and Geffen Corporation that used a slaughtering and impacted neuroplasm to forcibly extrude what they demanded for mysterian reasons would be the first thing that came to my mind, which in turn incited mayhem. Their injunction was in cold blood and in print: wear your inside out. When arrested for arriving to a Law School meeting room to cancel an appointment I was invited to, they arrested me for trespassing without reading me my rights. When I asked for the name of the girl, standing right there, who invited me, they accused me of resisting arrest. They said they wanted my soul put on trial. The lawyer for Warhol, Amanda Harcourt, made no secret of codified language, subliminals and unusual brainwave interrogation where they inflected that Rapid Eye Movement, caused by torture trauma and a nerve implant was proof of hiding date rape and to make sure of the punishment they raped my deaf advocate. Meanwhile, while forcing me to answer them, they told the most vicious people in Pittsburgh and Seattle every word I said, while libelously mongering that I was the one falsifying, even as streams of dishonesty surfaced from the violent crazies for whom they advocate. Non-coincidentally, Mr. Child used as his pretext that Scott Riback had shown me Federal Nuclear documents, a fact I brought up as a question of irresponsible conduct by their law school with Pitt Administration. The Sheriff’s Office of Allegheny County said with great anguish that no Jimmy Creary had never been accused of date rape. Even the girls denied it, but Media had a gimmick, impacted trauma, by which to demand the press caught.
Nuclear winter was a theory of great cold following apocalypse. The papers that scripted the AIDS attack were taken by a den of thieves known pithily as Nordenberg, a Praetorian pun on Nuremberg. You don’t want it reported because it would mean Snow-den, nyuck, nyuck.
