2+2=5 – As a real posthumous, ‘FU’ to George Orwell – the BBC has opted to place a bronze statue of the policeman, foreign war volunteer, journalist, and counter-bureaucratic author in front of the new Broadcasting House in London. Oddly, the BBC a target of Orwell in his novel, 1984, is identified as ‘The Ministry of Truth,’ an agency of propaganda and history revisionism. Yet, earlier this week, the BBC announced that it would be launching government approved ‘Spy Vans’ throughout the UK to ensure that their viewers and internet users were up to snuff, within their own homes. All at a time in our history when Orwell’s cryptic warning used to sit in the halls of the paranoid, from his 1949 novel, 1984, “Big brother is watching you,” which could not be more relevant in the mainstream.

Just beyond the statue, etched within the stone facade of the building will be a quotation from George Orwell,

If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

A choice of words I find odd to read alongside or within any form media, after all, in this state of affairs that we live in, we’ve almost ‘evolved’ past the worst fear of George Orwell in 1984. As we’re in an era when people are demanding to be lied to and are unquestioningly accepting the messages presented to them – despite the source. In fact, in many cases and despite the truth, people will argue and fight in defense of the often meaningless and pandering words presented to them. This is where we are in mass media communications today. Of which, I won’t cite an example of these many points, but invite you to look across the hall, and at what you disagree with – then ponder what they must think of you. Such is the landscape of now, and it presents the largest quandary for any journalist seeking to deliver the unwanted truth, which is to find a way to package the message so it will be heard. Even so, while providing news that might be published is not enough, nor is it a guarantee that the news will not be swiftly dismissed offhand for being counter to any of the readers’ beliefs. Consequently, few people care to read a counter-argument, conduct independent research, and even less dare to have their opinions challenged. That is of course, unless the message somehow incentivizes the audience.

Mass media dystopia,

Albeit, that is often not enough; for instance, you may receive a coupon or an offer to try some new laundry detergent, but you already have ‘your brand.’ For some reason or another, you’re loyal to this inanimate object that is sold to you by people who, at the end of the day only want your money. On the other hand, the coupon is for, ‘buy one, get one free,’ so maybe a few people loyal to the other brand will keep it around. Then, an internet, radio, shopping application, store ad, and/or television ad happens to grab your attention and it appeals to you with something familiar; such as family, friends, a cause, or an air of familiarity and understanding. OK, maybe then you’ll try out the new detergent. The business of changing opinions is massive, well structured, and quite honestly, a bit depressing as a reflection upon the decision-making processes of humanity. I went into some detail on this process within politics, in an earlier article on the Hillary campaign.

Still and all, any writer who steps up in this mad world, and makes an attempt beyond what is, buzz and click-worthy is already fighting outnumbered, and uphill. The real demand by the public is for what is entertaining. The public not only demands, but also requires a message that is formulated in such a way that requires a limited understanding of the topic, while agreeing with the primary ideology of the reading/viewing demographic, and most importantly – what is presented is simplistic. I don’t make these rules, but I review the ratings and know what works.

These are lessons I’ve picked up throughout my varying university coursework, and lessons that I hoped were not true. Albeit, after a stint in marketing, this terrible truth was verified to me – in real action, and a through real demand for the moronic messaging that clouds the day to day. That is when I left marketing for a string of adventures that landed me this gig. Along the way, I found plenty of propaganda distribution centers in Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, and elsewhere. Although, here I’ve found the same struggle that I’m certain that every other source of entertainment, news, and media has encountered and that is providing the public with what that want. Yet, as I’ve stated above, and contrary to George Orwell’s message and warnings, people most defiantly are not interested in the truth. People rather be entertained, and honestly focus on, or worry about what could and does concern their lives in the most immediate and convincing sense. Be it a belief or an idea complimentary to their own way of thinking, points, and tips to assist their lives or someone their care for and/or wish to influence, a segue for their fantasy life or image, or a threat that is presented as immediate.

It’s all about what’s comfortable in comfort and discomfort,

Hence, why such messages are delivered to the public, and despite conspiracy theory, are not presented via some global cabal seeking to dumb-down humanity. In fact, entertainment, news, and media sources are only giving the people what that want – and they must do so, if they want to stay in business. The same goes for causes, politics, and religion, as those leaders and spokespeople also convey the messages people demand and expect – so that they too can stay in business. People, for the most part, be it conscious or subconscious, just want to be told what they’re looking for and to be entertained while it’s being told to them. If they are not, they will not listen, and if they do not listen to you – then you’re out of business. This string theory of Machiavellian marketing is old but was once reserved for senior leaders. Yet today, it is everywhere as the normal model for what is expected of people within their chosen groups, outlets, and sources – these messages are their doctrine and gospel. For each segmentation of the public, and amongst their many groups, their message is true and regurgitated amongst themselves as if they are quoting an ancient holy text. A text which can never be questioned without a targeted message approval campaign from their figureheads. Nevertheless, it is not all bad, as the folks in the espionage business are able to pull information more easily than ever from what is mainstream, for nearly any deception and as the normal accepted practice. Studying groups has never been easier; again a topic I covered on the POTUS campaign trail.