Noam Chomsky on Propaganda - The Big Idea - Interview with Andrew Marr

Chomksy to Marr: "...I'm sure you believe everything you're saying, but ... if you believed something different, you wouldn't be sitting where you're sitting." ▶ this video

Look for discussion with British journalist Andrew Marr during a BBC interview in 1996. The lead in to the quote starts at ▶ this video "I don't say you're self-censoring - I'm sure you believe everything you're saying; but what I'm saying is, if you believed something different, you wouldn't be sitting where you're sitting." -- Noam Chomksy to Andrew Marr

I have heard Chomsky mention it on many occasions, one example here in an interview with Andrew Marr. ▶ this video

The press plays a much more important role when it comes to power. Manufacturing Consent by Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky is the classic text on the propaganda role of the press. link This old BBC interview with Noam Chomsky about the topic is also illuminating: ▶ this video

> Thus (not having read it myself), Manufacturing Consent could show how emergent properties of mass media might lead to them pushing a certain incorrect world view, rather than proposing a theory that requires the teams behind them to all agree to conspire and none of them to make that public knowledge. That is right. Chomsky proposes 5 filters through which this process happens. These filters operate, according to Chomsky, not just in media, but in all of society. From kindergarten to our deadbeds. I think this was best illustrated with Chomsky's 1996 interview in "The Big Idea" on BBC by Andrew Marr. Chomsky is outlining how the filters make sure certain viewpoints are popularized, and Andrew Marr asks "How can you know that I'm self-censoring?". To which Chomsky replies "I'm not saying you're self-censoring. I'm sure you believe everything you're saying. But what I'm saying is, if you believed something different, you wouldn't be sitting where you're sitting." The 30 minute episode[1] is well worth a watch, but the three minute clip of the above exchange is also available[2]. [1]: ▶ this video [2]: link

> It follows that most of the articles that appear opposed to powerful interests are a) inconsequential, or b) used as a distraction, helping to create the impression that the paper is anything but a powerful conservative force. It could also be taking on a rival powerful establishment interests, like in Democrats vs Republican type bickering. Chomsky in his famous Andrew Marr interview addressed Marr's example of Watergate scandal as one part of the establishment defending itself against another part of the establishment, thus allowing the story to be broken. He compared Watergate, which everybody knows about, to a much bigger scandal of the same time, COINTELPRO, which relatively few people have even heard about. The entire interview is worth watching: ▶ this video