¿Sabes qué sucede realmente con tus datos en facebook? ¿Eres consciente de que Facebook adquiere el derecho a hacer lo que quiera con las fotos y vídeos que subes? ¿Has pensado alguna vez en quién está realmente detrás de Facebook?
ÉSTE ES UN FALSO DOCUMENTAL que por desgracia es menos falso de lo que aparenta, que la CIA esté detrás no es ninguna novedad ni ningún secreto. ¿Por qué es un falso documental y no un documental? Pues, porque es un trabajo de clase y esas eran las instrucciones, y porque las pruebas que aportamos no son más que las que puede obtener cualquiera si investiga por internet. Así que... ¿estás dispuesto a hacer clic en el botón "Aceptar" y poner tu vida al alcance de las multinacionales? ¿Estás dispuesto a vivir un gran hermano? Tendemos a creer ingénuamente que todas aquellas facilidades que nos dan en internet son gratis, que no pagues no significa que sea gratis, estás ahorrando a las agencias de seguridad y las grandes empresas los estudios de mercado, ahora cualquiera puede saber qué haces y qué te gusta, cualquiera puede saber cómo hacer para que te compres una colonia o vayas a ver una película determinada al cine. Sólo por creer que tú puedes configurar el acceso a tu perfil no significa que no hayas cedido a Facebook el derecho de vender tus datos.
Showing posts with label psychology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label psychology. Show all posts
3.29.2010
La cara oculta de Facebook
3.21.2010
Multiple Intelligences - Howard Gardner
In this Askwith Forum, HGSE Professor Howard Gardner reflects on the 25 years since he proposed his new theory and definition of intelligence in his 1983 book entitled "Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences".
3.14.2010
2.08.2010
Cognitive Dissonance through Self-Imposed Ignorance
http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2010/01/cable_news.php
A new paper by Shawn Powers of USC and Mohammed el-Nawawy of Queens University of Charlotte looked at the effect of international cable news on the ideology of its viewers. Not surprisingly, they found that people were only interested in "news" that didn't contradict what they already believed:
Powers and el-Nawawy show that global media consumers tuned in to international news media that they thought would further substantiate their opinions about U.S. policies and culture, and provide them with information on the international issues that they deemed most important. The study found a strong relationship between the participants' attitudes toward U.S. policy and culture and their choice of broadcaster. Those who were dependent on BBC World and especially CNNI were overall more supportive of U.S. foreign policy.
[...]
The Princeton political scientists Christopher Achen and Larry Bartels analyzed survey data from the 1990's to prove this point. During the first term of Bill Clinton's presidency, the budget deficit declined by more than 90 percent. However, when Republican voters were asked in 1996 what happened to the deficit under Clinton, more than 55 percent said that it had increased. What's interesting about this data is that so-called "high-information" voters (these are the Republicans who read the newspaper, watch cable news and can identify their representatives in Congress) weren't better informed than "low-information" voters. According to Bartels, the reason knowing more about politics doesn't erase partisan bias is that voters tend to only assimilate those facts that confirm what they already believe. If a piece of information doesn't follow Republican talking points (and Clinton's deficit reduction didn't fit the "tax and spend liberal" stereotype) then the information is conveniently ignored.
The bleak lesson is that we turn the spotlight of attention into an information-filter, a way to block-out disagreeable points of view. Consider this experiment, which was done in the late 1960's, by the cognitive psychologists Timothy Brock and Joe Balloun.
Brock and Balloun played a group of people a tape-recorded message attacking Christianity. Half of the subjects were regular church-goers while the other half were committed atheists. To make the experiment more interesting, Brock and Balloun added an annoying amount of static (a crackle of white noise) to the recording. However, they allowed listeners to reduce the static by pressing a button, so that the message suddenly became easier to understand. Their results were utterly predicable and rather depressing: the non-believers always tried to remove the static, while the religious subjects actually preferred the message that was harder to hear. Later experiments by Brock and Balloun demonstrated a similar effect with smokers listening to a speech on the link between smoking and cancer. We silence the cognitive dissonance through self-imposed ignorance.
Read more...
Powers and el-Nawawy show that global media consumers tuned in to international news media that they thought would further substantiate their opinions about U.S. policies and culture, and provide them with information on the international issues that they deemed most important. The study found a strong relationship between the participants' attitudes toward U.S. policy and culture and their choice of broadcaster. Those who were dependent on BBC World and especially CNNI were overall more supportive of U.S. foreign policy.
[...]
The Princeton political scientists Christopher Achen and Larry Bartels analyzed survey data from the 1990's to prove this point. During the first term of Bill Clinton's presidency, the budget deficit declined by more than 90 percent. However, when Republican voters were asked in 1996 what happened to the deficit under Clinton, more than 55 percent said that it had increased. What's interesting about this data is that so-called "high-information" voters (these are the Republicans who read the newspaper, watch cable news and can identify their representatives in Congress) weren't better informed than "low-information" voters. According to Bartels, the reason knowing more about politics doesn't erase partisan bias is that voters tend to only assimilate those facts that confirm what they already believe. If a piece of information doesn't follow Republican talking points (and Clinton's deficit reduction didn't fit the "tax and spend liberal" stereotype) then the information is conveniently ignored.
"Voters think that they're thinking, but what they're really doing is inventing facts or ignoring facts so that they can rationalize decisions they've already made."
The bleak lesson is that we turn the spotlight of attention into an information-filter, a way to block-out disagreeable points of view. Consider this experiment, which was done in the late 1960's, by the cognitive psychologists Timothy Brock and Joe Balloun.
Brock and Balloun played a group of people a tape-recorded message attacking Christianity. Half of the subjects were regular church-goers while the other half were committed atheists. To make the experiment more interesting, Brock and Balloun added an annoying amount of static (a crackle of white noise) to the recording. However, they allowed listeners to reduce the static by pressing a button, so that the message suddenly became easier to understand. Their results were utterly predicable and rather depressing: the non-believers always tried to remove the static, while the religious subjects actually preferred the message that was harder to hear. Later experiments by Brock and Balloun demonstrated a similar effect with smokers listening to a speech on the link between smoking and cancer. We silence the cognitive dissonance through self-imposed ignorance.
12.29.2009
Are People Broken? Why We've Stopped Fighting Back Against the Forces of Oppression
· A psychologist asks: Have consumerism, suburbanization and a malevolent corporate-government partnership so beaten us down that we no longer have the will to save ourselves?
http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/144529/are_americans_a_broken_people_why_we%27ve_stopped_fighting_back_against_the_forces_of_oppression?page=entire
Can people become so broken that truths of how they are being screwed do not "set them free" but instead further demoralize them?
Do some totalitarians actually want us to hear how we have been screwed because they know that humiliating passivity in the face of obvious oppression will demoralize us even further?
What forces have created a demoralized, passive, dis-couraged U.S. population?
Can anything be done to turn this around?
Yes. It is called the "abuse syndrome." ...
No. For victims of the abuse syndrome, the truth of their passive submission to humiliating oppression is more than embarrassing; it can feel shameful ...
Maybe. ...
... today, most U.S. citizens are broken by financial fears. ...
We are also broken by a corporate-government partnership that has rendered most of us out of control when it comes to the basic necessities of life, including our food supply. A few examples:
Do some totalitarians actually want us to hear how we have been screwed because they know that humiliating passivity in the face of obvious oppression will demoralize us even further?
What forces have created a demoralized, passive, dis-couraged U.S. population?
Can anything be done to turn this around?
Can people become so broken that truths of how they are being screwed do not "set them free" but instead further demoralize them?
Yes. It is called the "abuse syndrome." ...
Does knowing the truth of their abuse set people free when they are deep in these abuse syndromes?
No. For victims of the abuse syndrome, the truth of their passive submission to humiliating oppression is more than embarrassing; it can feel shameful ...
Do some totalitarians actually want us to hear how we have been screwed because they know that humiliating passivity in the face of obvious oppression will demoralize us even further?
Maybe. ...
What forces have created a demoralized, passive, dis-couraged U.S. population?
... today, most U.S. citizens are broken by financial fears. ...
We are also broken by a corporate-government partnership that has rendered most of us out of control when it comes to the basic necessities of life, including our food supply. A few examples:
- Schools and Universities
- Mental Health Institutions
- Television
- Commericalism of Damn Near Everything
Can anything be done to turn this around?
When people get caught up in humiliating abuse syndromes, more truths about their oppressive humiliations don't set them free. What sets them free is morale, -the immobilized need a shot of morale.
12.16.2009
The (kids') eyes have it
· A visual trick opens a window on brain development.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/50610/title/FOR_KIDS_The_%28kids%29_eyes_have_it
Can you believe your eyes? A recent experiment suggests that the answer to that question may depend on your age.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/50610/title/FOR_KIDS_The_%28kids%29_eyes_have_it
Can you believe your eyes? A recent experiment suggests that the answer to that question may depend on your age.
In the experiment, kids and adults were asked to look at the same visual illusion — a picture that was designed to trick the viewer. The researchers who ran the experiment say that adults were more easily fooled by the illusion, and that the kids, especially those younger than age 7, saw the picture more accurately.
Size disguised: researchers asked volunteers to identify the biggest orange circle.
Here, each orange circle on the right is a little bit larger than the one on the left.
Misleading images usually fooled adults but not children,
while helpful images greatly aided adults but not kids.
The words “visual context” refer to how a person sees something in relation to the things around it. A baseball may look large when next to a golf ball, for example, but appear small when next to a basketball.
[...]
“When visual context is misleading, adults literally see the world less accurately than they did as children,” Doherty told Science News.
As children get older, Doherty said, their brains may develop the ability to perceive visual context. In other words, they will begin to process the whole picture at once: the tricky gray circles, as well as the orange circle in the middle. As a result, they’re more likely to fall for this kind of visual trick.
Read more...Size disguised: researchers asked volunteers to identify the biggest orange circle.
Here, each orange circle on the right is a little bit larger than the one on the left.
Misleading images usually fooled adults but not children,
while helpful images greatly aided adults but not kids.
[...] the experiment shows that what the brain does -to "see" visual context- is a process that develops slowly.
The words “visual context” refer to how a person sees something in relation to the things around it. A baseball may look large when next to a golf ball, for example, but appear small when next to a basketball.
[...]
“When visual context is misleading, adults literally see the world less accurately than they did as children,” Doherty told Science News.
As children get older, Doherty said, their brains may develop the ability to perceive visual context. In other words, they will begin to process the whole picture at once: the tricky gray circles, as well as the orange circle in the middle. As a result, they’re more likely to fall for this kind of visual trick.
11.06.2009
4.14.2009
Disney Expert Uses Science to Draw Boy Viewers
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/14/arts/television/14boys.html?_r=1&hp
ENCINO, Calif. — Kelly Peña, or “the kid whisperer[how freaky is this name!],” as some Hollywood producers call her, was digging through a 12-year-old boy’s dresser drawer[!!!] here on a recent afternoon. Her undercover mission: to unearth what makes him tick and use the findings to help the Walt Disney Company reassert itself as a cultural force among boys.
Ms. Peña, a Disney researcher with a background in the casino industry[?!], zeroed in on a ratty rock ’n’ roll T-shirt. Black Sabbath?
“Wearing it makes me feel like I’m going to an R-rated movie,” said Dean, a shy redhead whose parents asked that he be identified only by first name.
Jackpot.
To learn more about 'disney's plans for our children', go here...
4.04.2009
Meme Supreme: Predictive Programming In Action
http://thecleaver.blogspot.com/2009/04/meme-supreme-predictive-programming-in.html
The following photographs, which I [Neil Kramer, thecleaver.blogspot.com] took at the newspaper rack of my local store this morning, reveal the preparatory meme* seeding for the on-going Control System gear shift. Brazen in-your-face programming.
Predictive programming presents and acclimatizes the public to new ideas, trends and beliefs. Fundamentally, it forms compelling mental associations between emotionally charged concepts and word patterns. The programming attempts to fuse emotive and abstract elements together, such as: 'economic stability' and 'new world order', 'global co-operation' and 'new world order', and underpinning everything - 'security' and 'new world order'.
When a specific word pattern is then later invoked - new world order - the emotional charge (energetic frequency) is activated in the individual, and therefore the collective mind. The reality blueprint is being broadcast, across billions of pages and screens, enlisting the consciousness of those who choose not to create their own reality.
Observe how this viral meme seeding will escalate over the coming months.
Fortunately, unplugging from their cynical and insidious programming is uncomplicated. Turn it off. Organically program yourself... with your own feelings, discernment, humanity and knowledge. Conscious recognition of your own sovereign being neutralizes the charge of their pale proclamations.
* meme. –noun a cultural item that is transmitted by repetition in a manner analogous to the biological transmission of genes.
Predictive programming presents and acclimatizes the public to new ideas, trends and beliefs. Fundamentally, it forms compelling mental associations between emotionally charged concepts and word patterns. The programming attempts to fuse emotive and abstract elements together, such as: 'economic stability' and 'new world order', 'global co-operation' and 'new world order', and underpinning everything - 'security' and 'new world order'.When a specific word pattern is then later invoked - new world order - the emotional charge (energetic frequency) is activated in the individual, and therefore the collective mind. The reality blueprint is being broadcast, across billions of pages and screens, enlisting the consciousness of those who choose not to create their own reality.
Observe how this viral meme seeding will escalate over the coming months.
Fortunately, unplugging from their cynical and insidious programming is uncomplicated. Turn it off. Organically program yourself... with your own feelings, discernment, humanity and knowledge. Conscious recognition of your own sovereign being neutralizes the charge of their pale proclamations.
* meme. –noun a cultural item that is transmitted by repetition in a manner analogous to the biological transmission of genes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
