(Originally written on 10/9/2015 – before any nominee was chosen, but still extremely relevant)
Nancy Pelosi once said, “You can create any reality you want”. Mrs. Pelosi, of course, was referring to the recent release of the undercover videos exposing the butchery of Planned Parenthood. Now, we all realize that there was absolutely no doctoring of those videos. The full, unedited footage is widely available for consumption online. But to play to the uninformed or naive, you may be able to make the case that a sizable portion of the nation will certainly believe that they were contrived based upon Pelosi’s assertion alone. A large portion of the population is actually denying cold, hard evidence without even taking the task of investigating the claims themselves. It is an interesting phenomenon to witness. Based upon this phenomena, we are inadvertently given a window into a current trend occurring within the Democrat party. A trend that encompasses the methodology of the current White House administration’s propaganda tactics. By controlling an alternate “virtual” reality through the lens of social media, you can effectively shape public opinion. This new frontier can provide inventive and innovative ways of propaganda through misinformation marketing. Ultimately, we’re led to understand the new approach of the Democrats, more importantly Hillary Clinton’s “Catfish” Campaign strategy.
With campaign season upon us, I have to pine for the days of the campaigns of yesteryear. Shaking hands, Kissing babies, and simple public interactive persuasion…that was how it was done. Technological media advances have always had an impact on the methods of reaching people within the political arena. It has also had an impact upon the basis for the perceptions the public has of their political candidates. New advances in technology always comes with new political challenges. Looking back over time and through the history of political campaigns, the impact of technology is clearly evident. The rise of Radio gave way to the “personal touch and connection” with the populous, as evidenced with the “Fire Side Chats” of the FDR administration. Television changed the image standards of current politicians. In fact, many news outlets continually LOVE to revisit the Kennedy/Nixon televised debate of 1960. It is often cited by Left-wing News Media as the pivotal point in the campaign, This was the moment Nixon’s perspiration was similar to that which would most likely occur if Jenna Jameson was climbing into a Southern Baptist Pew after a cutting a “scene”. Ultimately, it showed a nervous lack of confidence with Nixon that was getting the best of him in real time. That new media forum allowed for a visual nuance to be added into future campaigns. With the rise of the internet and social media, the game has again changed and evolved the political candidacy of the major leagues.
The new age of social media is an intriguing and interesting animal. As a former working musician, I understood the need to exploit these channels upon their earliest inception. Starting with forums such as MySpace and Facebook, we began to connect with fans and friends in ways we never could have imagined were possible. This led to interesting and unintended consequences. I began to connect with old friends and acquaintances that I had lost touch with over decades ago. I even inadvertently connected to those that I had relationships with ages ago. That led to questions such as, “Whatever happened to Sarah?” “Oh Look! She sent me a request on Facebook! Oh, WOW… I’m glad our relationship didn’t go that far! I REALLY dodged that bullet!” Then, there were those that you knew had a grasp on reality and were blessed with above normal intelligence. “Whatever happened my buddy Jim? It looks like he’s doing really well!” But that’s when reality dawned on me. Just about everyone you know would not display the disputes and arguments that they have with their spouses, the times that they were pulled over by the police and were cited with a ticket, or whether or not they were ever involved in a fistfight at the neighborhood bar with someone who tried to hit on their wife. With the exception of those who post every single life crisis on their page in a passive aggressive cry for help, most of us use it as a way to personally “market” ourselves to friends and relatives. We put on a “social media facade” in order to display to everyone that we’ve ever encountered that we’ve actually obtained the “dream life”. Many would post pictures of their perfect relationships, houses, children, accolades, and all of the other successes that they had in their life. Then, after running into mutual acquaintances, you begin to learn that those same people were in the middle of a divorce, losing their house, and are splitting the children within viewing days and times. You learn their accolades were phony or not even close to the level that was conveyed. That’s when you begin to realize that using social media, you are able to create an image of an individual and have it be 180 degrees different than what is actually reality. Hillary Clinton and her campaign strategists, as well as the news media, understand this well. It defines the methodology that they currently employ.
Hillary Clinton has a difficult time connecting, which is mostly due to her lack of likability and sincerity. The media shrouds her acidic personality, which is rarely displayed to the public at large. The need for controlling her image is important to be able to persevere into the democratic primaries. She employs social media to field questions and provide her stances on issues. So, she must mold and fabricate another separate entity, one that cackles with ear grating laughter and portrays her as America’s, maternal “Grandmother”. This leads us to the current method by which Hillary and her campaign strategists have decided to conduct her campaign. Image control is the reason for announcing her Presidency via internet video, which was deployed on YouTube and then shared on Twitter. It also explains that when the initial video campaign kickoff didn’t catapult her campaign upon its release, they’ve resorted to rebooting the campaign on two additional occasions. Hillary 2016 4.0. What’s somewhat disturbing is her claims of a lack of technological prowess in the wake of her ‘Private Server” scandal. On one hand, she plays dumb with all of the “new fangled” technology at her disposal. On the other hand, she is meticulously building an alternate image of her “brand” and personality, all while maintaining a command and control presence ONLINE! She’s doing it all through the use of TECHNOLOGY! She can manipulate her online persona, as well as her interaction with potential voters. They’ve applied this approach in the real world as well. When general public interaction is possible, there’s no engagement with actual citizens. Those whom are considered “the general public” are actually hired operatives, with cameras set to roll in order to film the ensuing love fest. It explains why there has been cherry-picked reporters and preferred news outlets that will prop up this perfect image, in order for it to be controlled and massaged. It’s also one of the main reasons that the social media virtual reality approach has a heavy focus. News/entertainment media bias heavily aids in setting the tone with the public of both sides of the political aisle. It’s why one Presidential candidate will get coverage playing a Saxophone, Singing R&B, or flipping flapjacks on Late Night Talks Shows and early morning news programs and other candidates receive blistering, constant criticism and condemnation. If you are affiliated with the right particular political party, you will have cameos on Sketch Comedy Shows & Hipster Blog/Podcasts. Massaging propaganda is more effective and less painstaking in a social media forum than strictly coordinating all of the components necessary to achieve this goal with traditional news/entertainment media. The main goal, ultimately, is to use either of these methods to control your image while infecting the culture. This is usually in an attempt to paint a portrait of a candidate that may not be completely in line with their actual personality.
Fortunately, the Republican field of candidates offers a contrast and an amazing juxtaposition to Hillary’s approach, which is utterly stunning. With a field of contenders simultaneously echoing a message of self-reliance and small government many years into an age of rapidly growing government encroachment, it begins to show a stark difference that is truly refreshing. With their hearts on their sleeves and without the aid of large teleprompters, these candidates are “bullhorning” their messages almost in unison. Many of those listening to their offerings would’ve been too young to remember the sound of a leader who could speak with conviction and vision. Others will be able to remember the days of well-spoken and thoughtful leadership and be reminded as to how much we’ve missed that sound. Some, like myself, will have been at their wits end and feel a sense of relief from the sounds emanating from the collective of freedom fighting candidates. A “Read Through” styled, virtual reality campaign will have a TREMENDOUS struggle of immeasurable proportions in order to match those who are actually speaking from the heart. Along with the candidate anchoring email/classified information scandals currently affecting Hillary’s campaign, this public disconnection will be another “Achilles heel” derailing her coronation march. It could be the undoing of her self-proclaimed, quasi-“Queen of America”/”Political Outsider” duality, which currently defines her self-absorbed, politically obsessed candidacy. Many democrat presidential “investors” may be uncomfortable or even afraid of sacrificing their R.O.I., even with the “Insurance Policy” of inevitability that is currently being pitched by the mainstream news media and the Clinton crime family campaign camp. Time will certainly tell.