Tonight’s debate: watch the staging

Tonight’s debate: watch the staging

Every television newscast: staged reality

by Jon Rappoport

September 26, 2016

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

Watch how tonight’s Trump-Hillary debate is set up.

Are the two podiums the same size? No? Who has the bigger podium?

Is the lighting even, or are there shadows? Where do the shadows fall?

Is there blue color in the background, which exudes a “calming effect?”

How is the moderator, Lester Holt, lit? Is he spotlighted, haloed, to impart the sense that he’s the ultimate authority in the room?

What about camera angles on the two candidates? Are they receiving the same coverage, or is one more prominent? Are there close-ups?

Will cameras impart a sense of distance, in order to reduce dramatic effect and give the impression that the whole event is somewhat monotonous?

Will the audience be allowed to applaud and boo, or will Lester Holt control that?

To what degree will the candidates be allowed to wander off-topic? Will the reins be tight or loose?

How much time will each candidate be given to make statements? Will either or both of them be pinched, so they can’t say anything of substance?

Ah yes, substance. Context. Network news is famous for thin context:

The news is all about artificially manipulating the context of stories. The thinner the context, the thinner the mind must become to accept it. If you want to visualize this, imagine a rectangular solid. The news covers the top surface. Therefore, the mind is trained to work in only two dimensions. Then it can’t fathom depth, and it certainly can’t appreciate the fact that the whole rectangular solid moves through time…

Let’s consider some general background on the news:

The network evening news. This is where the staging is done well.

First, we have the image itself, the colors in foreground and background, the blend of restful and charged hues. The anchor and his/her smooth style. The overall effect: hypnotic, yet stimulating.

Then we have the shifting of venue from the studio to reporters in the field, demonstrating the reach of coverage: the planet. As if this equals authenticity.

Actually, those reporters in the field rarely dig up information on location. A correspondent standing on a rooftop in Cairo could just as well be positioned in a bathroom in a Las Vegas McDonald’s. His report would be identical.

The managing editor, usually the elite news anchor, chooses the stories to cover and has the final word on their sequence.

The anchor goes on the air: “Our top story tonight, more signs of gridlock today on Capitol Hill, as legislators walked out of a session on federal budget negotiations…”

The viewer fills in the (thin) context for the story: “Oh yes, the government. Gridlock is bad. Just like traffic on the I-5. A bad thing. We want the government to get something done, but they’re not. These people are always arguing with each other. They don’t agree. They’re in conflict. Yes, conflict, just like on the cop shows.”

The anchor: “The Chinese government reports the new flu epidemic has spread to three provinces. Forty-two people have already died, and nearly a hundred are hospitalized…”

The viewer again supplies context, such as it is: “Flu. Dangerous. Epidemic. Could it arrive here? Get my flu shot.”

The anchor: “A new university study states that gun owners often stock up on weapons and ammunition, and this trend has jumped quickly since the recent school-shooting tragedy…”

The viewer: “People with guns. Why do they need a dozen weapons? I don’t need a gun. The police have guns.”

The anchor: “Doctors at Yale University have made a discovery that could lead to new treatments in the battle against autism…”

Viewer: “That would be good. More research. Laboratory. The brain.”

If, at the end of the newscast, the viewer bothered to review the stories and his own reactions to them, he would realize he’d learned nothing. But reflection is not the game.

In fact, the flow of the news stories has washed over him and created very little except a sense of (false) continuity.

It would never occur to him to wonder: are the squabbling political legislators really two branches of the same Party? Does government have the Constitutional right to incur this much debt? Where is all that money coming from? Taxes? Other sources? Who invents money?

Is the flu dangerous for most people? If not, why not? Do governments overstate case numbers? How do they actually test patients for the flu? Are the tests accurate? Are they just trying to convince us to get vaccines?

What happens when the government has overwhelming force and citizens have no guns?

When researchers keep saying “may” and “could,” does that mean they’ve actually discovered something useful about autism, or are they just hyping their own work and trying to get funding for their next project?

power outside the matrix

These are only a few of the many questions the typical viewer never considers.

Therefore, every story on the news broadcast achieves the goal of keeping the context thin—night after night, year after year. The overall effect of this staging is: small viewer, small viewer’s mind, small viewer’s understanding.

The average viewer, having been entrained through years of watching the news, is going to come to tonight’s Presidential debate ready for thin context and no depth.

That’s the subconscious expectation.

Can this expectation be reversed in 90 minutes, regardless of what either candidate says?

And if either candidate suddenly punches a hole in that expectation, will the average viewer welcome it, or will he feel shocked and disturbed by the intrusion? Will he resent it?

Or to put it another way, which candidate more closely resembles a network news anchor—the familiar words, the familiar generalities, the thin context.

The networks that will broadcast the debate consider it a media/news event.

They will try to keep it within that space.

They think they own that space, which includes the viewer’s mind.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

29 comments on “Tonight’s debate: watch the staging

  1. lesha says:

    This article is so very much appreciated…. learning to dig deeper and deeper and asking the appropriate questions… If ever this was critical – it is now. Thanks, Jon.

  2. Terry Schiller says:

    “ALL of them WITCHES!” (Rosemary’s Baby)

  3. Theodore says:

    Washington Post Begs Readers: Please Stop Calling Us ‘The Media’

    The actual article is a pathetic attempt at rebranding now that they’re rightly the most hated people in America, nonetheless it’s hilarious

  4. Theodore says:

    “The American vs The Globalist.” — David Knight of

  5. Linda Gera says:

    Turn off the TV, research for yourselves and don’t use the mainstream media as they lie, omit, and exaggerate.

  6. paulydeathwish says:

    Tremendous dissection of what’s at issue. Image. Lighting. Mise-en-scène. Likewise, the anthropological concept of space vs. place (if I understand your final sentiment). All of this reminds me of the agenda-setting theory literature I have been perusing recently. Most of all, just wanted to congratulate you on a tremendous article!


  7. Michael Burns says:

    Also to note… the subconscious mind, the darker side of the psyche will be attacked, primed prodden and poked at, wearing it down…subliminal messages will be sent at low intensity light behind the imagery directly to the center of the audience minds. This has all be tailored, and shaped, it will be layered on as the final image to go out, to the televisions and computers of the world.

    The nano dust that you have breathed in and ingested from your food, that now resides between the synapses of that jelly like substance between your ears will be popping and zinging from the GWEN signal pumped out at 10 on the reichter scale. All purposing, those, what you think are original thoughts of whom is the appropriate candidate fro the office of POTUS.

    Do not under-estimate, they are very very good at this. They are masters in fact.

    One can gain an education on this matter from the great Wilson Bryan Key…a student of Marshall McLuhan. Also from McLuhan himself.

    Remember now the “MEDIUMISTHEMESSAGE”.

    Rorschachian imagery will be part of the creation of shadows, light effects. Who will receive red light behind them, who will receive blue light behind them? These are psychologically differences.

    Close-ups on the individuals will be a focus of this Rorschachian imagery.

    One must pay attention to the negative space around the individuals and objects on the set as Jon has ponted out. The shape of those objects.

    It does not take long to flash a split second image to a hungry mind, nothing escapes that mind as proven through hypnotherapy.

    They will use knowledge gained from the Solomon Asch and especially his conformity experiments, intensely within the audience members which will be pregnant with ringers brought in to aid in subtle and overt psychological ways. Inappropriate laughs, guffaws, giggles snears etc, yell outs, at precedent moments of a speaker speaking.

    Audience response will be primed also at key moments; individuals at audibly low frequencies behind the sound. The intensity of the light will be an exactitude on the individuals speaking.

    This will be a grand experiment in psychology….a mind sharpen and aware will notice the fix is in. And whom is the fix.

    Lots of things can piggy back ride on a microwave frequency; television, radio, internet…it can induce heat or cold…it can touch organs and skin (as in prickly feelings…and even distractions)

    May the force be with you….hopefully there will be survivors from this massive brain fuck.

    If your ears and eyes start bleeding profusely, cease and desist watching and listening to the debate. Seek immediate medical attention, your corpus collosum has exploded and your right and left hemispheres no longer are communicating with each…you are now an android. Welcome to the machine.

    I on the other hand have made an extra special super duper califragilistic tin foil suit and a hat, also a box with a week supply of food inside. I not taking any chances, little space cadets.

    Love and hand grenades to yah all 😉

    • arcadia11 says:

      lol. rousing good speech, mr burns, and sound advice.

    • Bunny says:

      Well don’t know about massive brain fuck- the elites that own both sides are trying to spin another “Noble Lie” for the muppets to rally around and keep them working against their own self interests…sorry they can use any psychotronic claptrap they want- some of us are still not believing the Wizard of Oz or assorted narcissist clones.

      I prefer to snap my own tight elastic, thanks

      What i DO know that calling these spectacles of illusion a “Debate” is an insult to actual debaters everywhere,

  8. R Andrew Ohge aka Dr Rex Dexter says:

    Who Really Cares? In A Recent Poll, We Have Trump At About 40%, Jill Stein At 30%, Then Johnson At 9% And Clinton At The Bottom At Just 7%. So WHY Isn’t The Debate Between The Two POLL FRONT RUNNERS? HRC Appears To Be A “Dead Man Walking”, Trump Keeps Managing To Put His Foot In His Mouth-THEN Shooting It. I’ll Watch The Alternative Debate-Stein-Johnson, NOT That It Matters More, Nut That This One Matters NOT AT ALL!

  9. Greg C. says:

    Trump gets such enthusiastic crowds at rallies because he comes off as authentic, and people are starved for a real live experience through their own eyes and ears. But now he turns himself over to the reality gatekeepers for this event. They are good at what they do, and it’s their home turf. If he can defeat them tonight by cutting through the illusion of the thin context, then he will have slayed the dragon in its own lair. Conventionality is out the window now – nothing less will do than the stunning spontaneity that has become Trump’s trademark.

  10. Theodore says:

    “The Hedgehog vs The Fox.” — Newt

    (i do not trust Newt (if he really is a NWO type) but he is a good orator)

  11. Theodore says:

    Video: Gary Johnson Sticks Tongue at Reporter During Interview

  12. Theodore says:

    Assuming both candidates are still breathing between Nov 9 and Jan 6 and that the election does occur on Nov 8,… in the last 40 to 50 years, I believe that nearly ALL states have laws on the books that invalidate/void an elector’s vote if he votes against the majority popular vote for the state. But, on the other hand, is doing so a punishable crime (fine and/or prison)? Maybe not a punishable crime.

    So, if the election is close (in terms of electoral votes) AND there are “voided” electoral votes — which then cause a “less than 272”, then what? Automatically throw it to the House? (ref: 12th amendment;

    11/8: US Presidential Election

    (Note: A candidate’s concession speech does not impact the states’ duties and responsibilities related to the Electoral College system.)

    12/13: States: Final day to resolve any controversies over the appointment of electors. | Should a state have a statistical tie of the popular vote, then a run-off election would need to be completed before 12/13.

    12/19: States: The meeting of the Electors to vote. They still use paper ballots, thank God!

    12/28: Deadline for President of Senate to receive the electoral votes from the states.

    1/3: Congress begins new session.

    1/6: Congress, in joint session, counts the electoral votes.

    1/20: Inauguration.

  13. Theodore says:

    The currently-dormant-for-now-but-incubating ‘cultural revolution’ generation…

    Hofstra University Provides ‘Trigger Warning’ for Presidential Debate

    According to CBS New York reporter Tony Aiello, a sign inside of the student center at Hofstra reads, “Trigger warning: The event conducted just beyond this sign may contain triggering and/or sensitive material. Sexual violence, sexual assault, and abuse are some topics mentioned within this event. If you feel triggered, please know there are resources to help you.”

  14. Ms. D says:

    I am not an american But have seen the atrocities that have been inflicted upon millions of people in countless countries over many years. I LOVE this article because they “own” the media, they profess to own the world and their extreme hatred for the deplorables. HRC and her gang, will give it their best shot tonight. Thank you for laying the groundwork for looking out for their hidden manipulation of this event. I and many millions of others are totally fed up with the way this planet is run. Thanks for being on the front lines!

  15. AnotherLover says:

    The stagings already done: all the false flag crazy shootings and stabbings over the weekend. Expect Clinton to HAMMER AWAY at gun control and the terrible, horrible effects of local control of police departments, what with all the “racism” involved. This whole weekend was a set-up for her, imho. All she has to do is open the valve. Trump better have some serious judo skills on the topic, or he will be demolished.

  16. Joe Nieroski says:

    Hillary comes across as condescending from the start. She wants to be Empress so badly, she will sell herself as a savior to the world. Not mentioned is how many of the problems existing today were hatched by the first Clinton administration, grew to fruition during the Bush43 years and are now rotting under Obama.

    “As for your earlier question, I would like to answer that with either true or false… None of the above.” (just honking around, no one really said this)

  17. Sam says:

    Yes, it was a setup, the debate was far from fair, made in Clinton’s image. Holt, was a joke as far as fair and balanced goes, he was all for Clinton as was the audience. Though most of the polls I have tracked tonight say Trump won the debate, I, don’t think he did; In fact, I think he lost badly and the MSM will starting tomorrow tell us all about it. Trump, needs a speech coach and a new team supporting him, he is too redundant and far from polished. Never send a businessman to debate a Lawyer. Something I hope the non-white communities picked up was Trumps response to the race question; Trump is right to insist the black and other non-white neighborhoods, where nearly all of the gun play occurs needs strong policing and even a stop and frisk law; It is not white people with guns doing all the killing in the non-white neighborhoods, taking the guns from white people like Hillary wants to do is counter-productive, I think, and just makes white’s easy targets too. Right now I think Trump is riding a white wave, if the dirty tricks the other side has up their sleeves really take hold, it is Clinton for four more years and the end of the USA as we all know it.

  18. Cjay says:

    An observation that I made while watching the debate last evening that I have yet to see anyone mention: Hillary thinks all this is funny. I mean, the majority of the time she had this big out-of-place smile on her face when in fact, none of this is a laughing matter. What? Deciding which candidate is the best choice for POTUS is a comedic routine?? Maybe it is for her, but if you’ll remember, Donald Trump was dead serious about what he said and the responses he gave. It wasn’t funny to him, at all.

    Usually, and check with a psychologist if you doubt this, but an overt tendency to inject ‘humor’ into a situation that is hardly that, indicates a defense mechanism and an aversion to being truthful. Of course, Hillary’s history on this precedes this argument, but the on-stage performance and mannerisms she displayed would validate this hypothesis. Body language is a hard thing to hide.

  19. Bea Ware says:

    Words directly behind Trump’s shoulder: ‘the Right’ Words surrounding Clinton ‘most likely’, indeed, light.

  20. Stacy says:

    Jon, Have you seen this video documenting Hillary’s signalling to Lester Holt? She’s like a baseball coach on the sideline!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.