I want a view of the Dis Information Management (DIM) efforts of the current regime so that I can mainatain my little patch of credibility. Who trax the dangerous places? Am I DIM positive?
Those in power today achieved and maintain their power through information management - and Disinformation management. I am not immune to manipulation. Perhaps I've annoyed and frustrated you when I discuss some controversial views about current and past events. Am I skeptical enough about an alternative explanation for an events such as 9-11, the War on Drugs, or the Immigration Debate, often referred to disdainfully as a CT - Conspiracy Theory? What about the more subtle and insidious memes? Am I supporting DIM efforts? It's fair to ask!
In this era of war, public opinion about source credibility is critical. It makes a difference if a source is Fox News, or the Wall Street Journal editorial page, or the White House. Or Judy Miller.
While I want to be credible, not credulous, in these times I may err. What should I do - should I fear being ridiculed? Having just read an essay, On Responsible Conspiracy Theory - http://www.dailykos.com/... - I am reminded of the fragility of source credibility. I want to be as skeptical about "alternative" explanations for terrifying events as I am about the "official" explanations, but I have not yet achieved that level of objectivity. I should be as skeptical as I am about ostensible coincidences not explained by the official stories spread by powerful, interested and engaged parties.
Credibility is tough to earn and harder to recover. Bush regime supporter trolls could post such that DailyKos is discredited. They succeed if the site is perceived an ideologically pure site lacking in objective debate. Beyond evidence that some have trolls have attempted to plant Conspiracy Theory lies - easily discredited - to smear the forum, are there more subtle patters of DIM contamination?