blockquote, div.yahoo_quoted { margin-left: 0 !important; border-left:1px
#715FFA solid !important; padding-left:1ex !important; background-color:white
!important; } blockquote, div.yahoo_quoted {margin-left:0
!important;border-left:1px #715FFA solid !important;padding-left:1ex
!important;background-color:white;}blockquote, div.yahoo_quoted {margin-left:0
!important;border-left:1px #715FFA solid !important;padding-left:1ex
!important;background-color:white;}In my opinion, "fake news" is neither "new"
nor a US-only phenomenon.
It's just one more trait of a "marketing society."
Giles Deleuze noted it ~40 years ago:
<<Foucault emerged as a highly regarded advocate of Glucksmann. He supported
him when he published his book La Cuisinière et le Mangeur d'Hommes and in 1977
wrote a positive review of his The Master Thinkers. Only a month after this
review, Deleuze circulated a short treatise on the New Philosophers, in which
he mercilessly unmasked them. As he did not want to turn to the media, he
decided to publish the text and distribute free copies in bookstores. In the
treatise, Deleuze analysed how journalism was changing as a result of marketing
becoming ever more important. Television and radio talks, discussions, and
interviews often counted for more than the books being discussed. Audiovisual
media in particular gave journalism the power to control opinion through
surveys, to determine the importance of different incidents, and even to
generate several incidents on its own. Deleuze talked of a "a new type of
thought, the interview-thought, the conversation-thought, the sound
bite-thought."[17] He realized that the New Philosophers, in trying to utilize
the power of the media for themselves, were encouraging the surrender of
thought to the media. They were reducing thought to the form of the interview,
and jumping on all creative thinking in order to inhibit it. "This marketing
enterprise represents the submission of thought to the media. By the same
token, thought offers the media a minimum intellectual guarantee and peace of
mind to stifle any attempts at creation which would make the media themselves
evolve.">>
[18]
Foucault-Blog - UZH - Forschungsstelle für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte:
Deleuze, a Split with Foucault
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
| |
Foucault-Blog - UZH - Forschungsstelle für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte:
Deleuze, a Split with Foucault
| |
|
|
Towards the end of his prolific life, Deleuze wrote "Postscript on the
Societies of Control," a succinct manifesto on the topic:
Postscript on the Societies of Control on JSTOR
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
| |
Postscript on the Societies of Control on JSTOR
Gilles Deleuze, Postscript on the Societies of Control, October, Vol. 59
(Winter, 1992), pp. 3-7
| |
|
|
too bad Aaron Hillel Swartz was "suicided" for trying to open those vaults, but
fortunately this particular text is freely available on the internet, pick your
source. This one from UCLA:
http://classes.dma.ucla.edu/Fall15/252A/content/readings/deleuze-postscript-on-the-societies-of-control.pdf
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Wednesday, January 11, 2017, 12:40 AM, F LM <flucom...@gmail.com> wrote:
As someone who doesn't live in the US, I find this whole "fake news" issue
somehow confusing.
It seems to me that it's a very wide concept created by media like The
Guardian, NYT, etc., in order to discredit certain efforts by Trump supporters
to influence voters based on false information (social media profiles, online
articles, etc.). However, as time goes by, I see fake news coming out more and
more from that same left-wing propaganda machine with misinformation,
highly-biased pieces and more often than not, blatantly false reports.
What are the first public mentions of this controversial concept in the press?
Perhaps that would give me a bit more of light.
FL
> On 11-01-2017, at 00:27, Manuel Amador (Rudd-O) <rud...@rudd-o.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/09/2016 04:51 AM, Yosem Companys wrote:
>> Anyone know of any academic studies showing that fake (social media)
>> news influenced the 2016 presidential election outcome?
>
> The election was influenced by fake media alright, but the victory in
> the U.S. elections is *despite* the fake media, not because of it.
>
> Fake media — CNN, WaPo, The Times., all that brainwashing nonsense —
> was basically against the winner. He won nonetheless.
>
> *shruggie*
>
> I don't have to live with that result, but it's the truth.
>
>
> --
> Rudd-O
> http://rudd-o.com/
>
>
> --
> Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of
> list guidelines will get you moderated:
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe,
> change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
> compa...@stanford.edu.
--
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of
list guidelines will get you moderated:
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe,
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
compa...@stanford.edu.
--
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of
list guidelines will get you moderated:
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe,
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
compa...@stanford.edu.
