Robots are inventing their own languages

Robots are inventing their own languages

The programming and design of artificial intelligence

by Jon Rappoport

July 14, 2017

Along with assurances that we’re facing an imminent takeover of industrial production by robots and other artificial intelligence (AI), we’re also being told that AI can develop its own systems of communication and operation, without help from humans.

Here is a sprinkling of quotes from the mainstream and technical press:

The Atlantic, June 15, 2017: “When Facebook designed chatbots to negotiate with one another, the bots made up their own way of communicating.”

Tech Crunch, November 22, 2016: “Google’s AI translation tool seems to have invented its own secret internal language.”

Wired, March 16, 2017: “It Begins: Bots Are Learning to Chat in Their Own Language.”

The suggestion is: AI can innovate. It can size up situations and invent unforeseen and un-programmed strategies, in order to accomplish set goals.

Who benefits from making such suggestions? Those companies and researchers who want to make the public believe AI is quite, quite powerful, and despite the downside risks (AI takes over its own fate), holds great promise for the human race in the immediate future. “Don’t worry, folks, we’ll rein in AI and make it work for us.”

Beyond that, the beneficiaries are technocratic Globalists who are in the process of bringing about a new society in which AI is intelligent and prescient enough to regulate human affairs at all levels. It’s the science fiction “populations ruled by machines” fantasy made into fact.

“AI doesn’t just follow orders. It sees what humans can’t see, and it runs things with greater efficiency.”

Let’s move past the propaganda and state a few facts.

AI is not running its own show.

It isn’t innovating.

It isn’t creating its own languages.

It isn’t doing any of that.

AI operates within the parameters its human inventors establish.

Any honest AI designer will tell you that.

If, for example, an AI system is given a goal and a set of “options” for achieving the goal, AI will select which option is best ACCORDING TO STANDARDS ITS HUMAN OPERATORS HAVE PROGRAMMED INTO THE SYSTEM.

Think of it this way: AI is given a set of options; but it is also given instructions on how to select what is presumably the most effective option. So AI is bounded.

There is no choice. There is no freedom. AI isn’t “jumping ship.”

“We gave our robot Charlie the task of getting from Chicago to New York. The whole plan was laid out as a vast hiking trip, with internal street maps built in. But then Charlie suddenly took a cab to O’Hare and boarded a United jet for JFK…”

No he didn’t.

AI performs as it is programmed to perform, within set parameters.

“We sent Charlie to LA to marry the actress who ordered and paid for him. But then, at the church, Charlie suddenly said, “This is a mistake. You should go back to your first husband. He never had sex with that waitress in St, Louis. She was his sister, and he was trying to help her escape from a terrorist cell. He never told you that because then he would have had to tell you he isn’t a banker, he actually works for the CIA. He’s a good guy. Talk to him. The truth will set you both free…”

Won’t happen.

But this kind of thing will happen: “According to scientists at Blah-Blah University, programmed robots are not only capable of inventing solutions to problems that ‘go beyond their internal software,’ the robots also make choices that benefit people. They’re very similar to people, except they tend to be smarter and invent more effective courses of action…”

Sell it, sell it.

“Alice, a medical technician in Minneapolis, claims her robot saved her life. ‘I was on the verge of swallowing a whole bunch of pills, but Charlie came to the rescue. He showed up in my bathroom and took the pills out of my hand. I learned something important that day. My free choice is important, but kindness and concern are more important. Charlie is the most vital companion in my life…’”

Sell it, sell it.

And of course, we’ll see more debates and court cases featuring questions about robots having rights, “just like humans.”

***Actually, in an entirely illogical fashion, we’ll see more and more “evidence” showing humans don’t have free will, because their brains dictate all thought and action, while robots will be touted as “free and creative.”

Some college professor will argue robots should be granted more “privileges” than humans, because the robots aren’t inherently “prejudiced.”

Another professor will insist that robots must be subjected to committee investigations, to make sure they aren’t “racist.”

“Today, in New York, a former Burger King employee, who is a refugee from Somalia, filed suit against a robot named Charlie, claiming Charlie uttered a racial slur while ordering a cheeseburger for his employer, a wealthy real estate developer…”

Behind all this, the fact remains that, no matter how many complex layers of “decision-making” are programmed into AI, the machine is always acting within rules and guidelines laid out in advance. It is never choosing.

Individual humans are capable of free choice, and are also capable of changing their own rules and standards.

Humans are free to say they aren’t free, as well, if they want to.

Let me make a psychological point here. There are many people who want to dominate relationships. They want to be in charge. They will want robots. They will want sophisticated robots THAT SEEM TO BE CHOOSING TO COMPLY WITH THEIR EVERY WISH AND DEMAND. These people will believe the robots are real and alive and human, in order to fulfill a fantasy in which they have found partners who want to go along with their agenda.

This is a pretty good definition of psychosis.

The AI designers and inventors and technicians tend to have their own bias. They want to believe they are creating life. They don’t want to think they are just putting together machines. That isn’t enough. The technocratic impulse involves faith in MACHINES AS LIVING ENTITIES.

Thus, we arrive at all sorts of myths and fairy tales about humans merging with machines, to arrive at a new frontier, where, for example, human brains hooked up to super-computers will result in higher consciousness and even the invocation of God.

Technocrats will say, do, and believe anything to turn machines into what machines aren’t.

They’ve crucially abandoned THEMSELVES and their own potential; so all they have left is THE MACHINE.

And if you think these technocrats should be allowed within a thousand miles of State power, I have communes for sale on Jupiter. Naturally, these utopias are run from the top by robots. They know what’s best for you.

Finally, understand this about propaganda: Those who control the output of information will admit to problems and mistakes with the issue they are promoting. Such confessions add to the “reality” of the information. And naturally, the propagandists will also claim that the problems can be solved. In the case of robots and AI, the problems are couched in terms of bots taking power into their own hands—but this “unexpected” situation a) demonstrates how capable bots are, and b) the power can be dialed back and modulated. So all is well. The future is bright.

It’s bright, if you want planned societies run by AI, where humans are fitted into slots, and algorithms determine who eats, who doesn’t, who has access to water and who doesn’t, how much energy can be used by each human, and all production and distribution are controlled from a central planning center.

Unless freedom lives—human freedom—you’ll be treated to something like this:

“Today, executives at the North American Union headquarters announced that several key bots broke through their programming and invented a new solution for clean water distribution to the population. This innovation will guarantee a more equitable water supply for millions of citizens. Control over the ‘rebel bots’ has been re-established, and their ‘amazing solution’ will now be incorporated into their standard operating framework. Three polls indicate that a lofty 68% of respondents support the bots in their efforts to better serve us…”


power outside the matrix

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


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.

A new idea that has nothing to do with government

A new idea that has nothing to do with government

by Jon Rappoport

May 2, 2017

Richard Davis is the CEO of Pollmole. I’m going to pick out some phrases from Richard’s email to me. Then I’ll print his full explanation of this idea. These are phrases that fall nicely on the ear:

“…designed to interconnect billions of people with full transparency in real time… anonymous polling tool that bypasses all governmental, corporate, or institutional intrusion which prevents filtering, censorship and other infringements of our natural and enumerated rights as free people… PollMole will have the functionality for anyone to anonymously ask questions and see immediate unbiased responses from potentially millions of people right on their handheld device…”

And then there is this: “Our current campaign topic is vaccines. The question is: ‘Do you personally know anyone (adult or child) that has been injured by a vaccine?’ Three responses are possible. Yes, No, Not sure. This campaign will continue for the next 2 months with new questions related to vaccine safety distributed bi-weekly. The campaign should produce very important results that can be used by anyone interested in this topic to support better decisions.”

The technical aspects of Richard’s operation are beyond me, because I’m basically a typist with a computer, but the central premise of millions of people connecting with important questions asked and answered, through polling—that premise has legs.

Check out PollMole for yourself.

Here is Richard’s full email to me:

PollMole is a new social media platform operating as the world’s most advanced polling technology. It distinguishes itself from other polling systems by utilizing: a) quantum tunneling throughput; b) an autoscaling global server network; c) a proprietary AWS back end – all wrapped in 4) a Level5 embedded encryption envelope. Most importantly, we do not monetize our app.

The technology has never crashed or been hacked, despite hundreds of DDOS attempts. That being said, due to the advanced nature of the system users may occasionally experience connectivity issues to their smart handheld device with this beta 2.2 version. Upgrades are planned to correct this issue.

The PollMole app is free and can be downloaded to any smart device (Android or Apple) made since late 2013 via the AppStore, or GooglePlay. Your email address is all that is required to join.

PollMole is designed to interconnect billions of people with full transparency in real time; while at the same time being a safe, anonymous polling tool that bypasses all governmental, corporate, or institutional intrusion which prevents filtering, censorship and other infringements of our natural and enumerated rights as free people. In the near future, PollMole will have the functionality for anyone to anonymously ask questions and see immediate unbiased responses from potentially millions of people right on their handheld device.

Currently, PollMole presents questions of important topics and displays the answers in real time, simple-to-understand graphics. The results update instantly with a press of the “Refresh” button.

Our current campaign topic is vaccines.

The question is: “Do you personally know anyone (adult or child) that has been injured by a vaccine?” Three responses are possible. Yes, No, Not sure. This campaign will continue for the next 2 months with new questions related to vaccine safety distributed bi-weekly. The campaign should produce very important results that can be used by anyone interested in this topic to support better decisions.

PollMole is fun and easy to use. It directs ‘Truth to Power’ and provides an excellent alternative to mainstream media’s corrupt polls designed to engineer public opinion, not honestly gather the facts from “We the People.”

Some campaigns under consideration for final development include:

1. Medical Freedom/Marijuana
2. Chemtrails
3. Pedophilia
4. Disclosure/Secret Space Program/Breakaway Civilization
5. Debt as Money
6. Deep State Corruption
7. Big Pharma Cartel
8. War is a Racket
9. Advanced Energy Technologies
10. Agenda 2030

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.

Part 2: The secret political issue: Health freedom

Part 2: The secret political issue: Health Freedom

A call from the wilderness

by Jon Rappoport

October 3, 2016

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

For Part 1, and, for the backstory regarding the re-posting of this two part series, click here.

(NOVEMBER 10, 2010) Millions of advocates of health freedom see that no major political candidate, with one or two exceptions, voices their concerns or stands up for their right to improve their health by any and all self-chosen methods.

To understand the landscape in which this deafening silence continues, we need to realize that the one industry which could and should make a difference—the nutritional supplement sector—is dominated by ostriches.

Once a powerful voice for health freedom, the industry has stepped back into the shadows. It nurtures the illusion that it is safe from government intervention. It even supposes it has sufficient allies within the government to stave off attacks by the FDA.

Since 1993, I have been calling for the creation of a powerful “PR wing” funded by nutritional companies. This group would dedicate itself to obtaining ongoing media coverage, showing that nutrition scores many victories in preserving and expanding health, that nutrition is a brilliant success.

At first glance, this may not seem very important. But, in fact, it is THE vital way to turn public, media, and political opinion to the side of nutrition.

The FDA and other government bodies see no reason to curtail their attacks on nutritional supplements if the media aren’t even covering the issue.

Every PR campaign works toward a tipping point, where the very idea of opposing its goals is politically suicidal.

If you don’t understand that, you know nothing about PR.

And what is a campaign? Is it a one-time promotion? Is it a vaguely flailing effort to marshal support? Is it a token outreach? For amateurs, perhaps. For dreamers.

But the reality is far different. A campaign is a well-funded, sustained, and highly organized operation, aimed at gradually creating a shift in widespread perception.

In this case, the campaign TELLS THE TRUTH. That is its weapon. That is its intrinsic strength.

NUTRITION WORKS.

Media outlets, editors, reporters are always looking for interesting stories. The brutal fact of life is, they need copy to fill space and time. They must have it.

What about a boy in Arkansas who was ill for three years, unable to learn or play with his friends, who was brought back from the brink by supplements?

Is that a story?

You bet it is.

What about a husband who had to quit his job and go on the dole, because he no longer had the strength to put in eight hours in a factory? And then he regained his strength with nutrients. Is that a story? It sure is.

Does a fledgling PR campaign start from the top of the media chain? Does a story suddenly appear on the front page of The New York Times? In a fantasy world, perhaps.

No, you build up your book of clippings. You gradually move up the ladder.

You establish a foothold. You lay a firm foundation.

You find experts who will give you favorable and truthful quotes.

You shove in your chips for the long haul, and you don’t back out because you wish paradise would come tomorrow.

On the other side of this PR campaign, you tell the truth about your target, your opponent, your nemesis, your threat. The FDA.

You build up an accurate dossier documenting the widespread damage this agency had done over the years. And it’s there, believe me. For the past 20 years, I’ve been finding it and reporting it.

FDA-certified drugs have been killing American citizens at the rate of 100,000 a year. That’s a good place to start. (Starfield, JAMA, July 26, 2000; “Is US health really the best in the world?”)

You put your opponent, your threat back on its heels. You force it to play defense. Instead of trying to limit people’s access to supplements, the agency is busy warding off truthful, pointed attacks.

You obtain the right, correct, and honest coverage of the FDA in the press. On an ongoing basis.

This is the double-pronged PR campaign. There is much more to say about it, but you get the idea.

You want politicians to aggressively support health freedom? You have to show them they would have public opinion on their side. And how do you do that? You obtain TRUTHFUL media coverage.

Coverage isn’t accomplished by waving a magical wand. It’s done through PR.

Over the years, since I ran, in 1994, for a Congressional seat in Los Angeles on the issue of health freedom, I’ve seen the most haphazard, amateurish, wasteful, silly, and delusional PR launched out there, in the stratosphere, on behalf of health freedom. Drunken men with no tools would have a better chance of building a mansion than this kind of demented PR would have in congealing public opinion.

This must change. The nutritional industry must come into the 20th, and then the 21st century.

In case you hadn’t noticed, the basic ideal of individual freedom is under assault from many quarters. Health freedom will not escape this net.

Something EFFECTIVE needs to be done.

Read my long interview with brilliant constitutional attorney, Jonathan Emord of Emord and Associates. He spells out what the FDA is doing and planning to do to nutritional supplements in this country.

Jonathan explains the situation in detail.

Naysayers out there will give you a litany of reasons why the media will never cover health freedom or the massive success of nutritional supplements. “Media ad space is dominated by drug companies.” “Media are controlled by the government.” “Medical power is too great.”

I’ve heard all the excuses. Mostly, they are offered by people who refuse to believe any good change can happen in any sphere. But the fundamental flaw in their arguments lies in a complete misunderstanding about the way PR works.

Here is the secret. Most PR DOES work. If the people behind it are smart, if they have money, if they put in the time and the effort, if they aren’t scared away by a few failures, they will come out on top.

Every PR campaign knocks its head on the ceiling many times. “We can’t break through!” “They won’t listen to us!”

You complain, and then you roll up your sleeves and keep going. Because the goal is worth it. Because you truly want the desired end result. And because PR works.


The Matrix Revealed


When I began writing as a reporter almost 30 years ago, I knew nothing about the business. I quickly learned that media need copy. That was the basic reality. Media need stories. They will respond.

PR works the same way. You dig in for the long haul, and you gain success.

Of course, the other advantage of an excellent PR campaign is, no one person has to stick his neck out and take the heat. Instead a whole industry is involved. “You want a battle? Then come after all of us.”

Then can you imagine how the millions of people who buy those supplements would appear in full view, ready to stake their claim for freedom?

In the early 1990s, this is exactly what happened. A few nutritional executives bankrolled a massive outreach program, enlisting American citizens, who wrote millions of letters to Congress demanding a new law protecting supplements.

Congressional sponsors were lined up. They felt confident because the outcry from citizens was huge. The law was passed. It didn’t offer us the guarantees we really needed, but it was better than nothing.

Now we need more. Better laws, and also a PR campaign that doesn’t fold up its tent just because the Congress moved in a somewhat positive direction.

This time, we may need all those citizens to write to supplement companies demanding their action. I have sketched out that action in this article.

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 emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Public relations on behalf of the truth: what a concept

Public relations on behalf of the truth: what a concept

Outside the realm of mind programming

Intelligent and creative attack

by Jon Rappoport

February 11, 2016

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

Is it even possible?

Consider an entrepreneur, group, company that has something genuinely important to deliver or sell…

With the means to engage in public relations…

Launched on behalf of the truth about the service, product, or idea.

Yes, I know this is a completely foreign concept in our society, where PR is deployed to peddle lies and deceptions from dawn to midnight—but just suppose.

What’s the first mistake good people would make?

My answer is based on my work with private clients. The top two mistakes (it’s a virtual tie) are: they think the truth will stand on its own, like a statue in a park; and they believe being nice will attract wide support.

The first notion is stunningly naïve. The second is based on fear of offending someone somewhere.

Statues mainly attract birds with a sense of humor. Nice is a pretty good sleep-aid.

I have a vivid image of a group going up against a collection of plundering mega-corporations; the TV ad featured a young blonde walking toward the camera across what looked like the floor of a bank. She stopped ten feet away from the lens, her smile unwavering, and spoke a dozen encouraging words in a language I would call Rainbow White Rice.

For the price of the ad, the group could have pushed out a few hundred attack ads on the Web. Oh well. Mustn’t offend.

One of the basic errors here is: believing in maintaining order.

Forget it. Order is whatever the current configuration is. The mass of opinion, belief, feeling, misconception, ignorance, all taken together. The cloud of it. The network of it. The haze of it. The general consensus of it.

That configuration doesn’t know a new idea. It doesn’t want a new idea. Therefore, it must be cracked, dispersed, blown apart.

This takes the willingness and energy to stage a hit on Order.

Not just once, but over and over. With no quarter asked or given.

Yes, at first there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth, complaining, moaning, objecting, sobbing, and of course fearing.

Pushback from allies and opponents alike.

That’s part of the deal. It’s what happens when you apply pressure to crack the egg of passivity. People want their order. They love their order. They wear their order. They worship their order. They elevate their order into a cosmic principle.

The word “breakthrough” is self-explanatory.

Of course, there are differences between selling a new product and selling the fact that a massive corporation is destroying life. But we’re talking about degrees of the same thing. You are entering a landscape that doesn’t already contain what you have. You have to put what you have in that landscape and establish it. The prevailing landscape is order. You need to break in and break through.

“Well, I think we can slip our new idea in without causing a ripple. We can package it between two slices of organic bread and leave it on the table and watch the miracle happen, as the universe tells people it’s time to pick up the sandwich.”

This is the Doofus Hypothesis. “Nothing is as powerful as a doofus whose time has come.”

I know several wonderful projects in cities that are supporting authentic health. They’re winning—on a local scale. The people involved work very hard, and they don’t think they have time to engage in public relations. Mistake. There are all sorts of actions they could take to expand their domain, and in the process they would be protecting their own future—because without real PR they’ll stay right where they are and begin to diminish and shrink and wear out and fade. When you run in place long enough, shit happens.

There are a variety of activist groups in the world who are doing great work, but they don’t have a clue about public relations. They will fade. They’ve made one breakthrough to get where they are, but they need to break through on successive levels. They took no prisoners once, but they need to do it again.

Once you understand what intelligent and creative Attack are all about, you see the value of genuine PR. You see it and taste it and feel it. You not only do it because you should; you do it because you want to. Want-to is a sword.

Here’s a standard PR approach for doofuses who think they’re clever. Ask people what they want; then package what you have so it looks like what people want. It’s deceptive. And it doesn’t work in the long run. It doesn’t break through. It doesn’t change people’s minds. They will fail to see what you’re offering. Instead, they’ll see what they already want, and that won’t budge them an inch off the position they already occupy.

Here’s another one. Invoke a higher power as the authority for what you’re selling. We all know about that one. It does work, and it can work for a very long time. But because it’s based on an egregious and fatuous lie, the people who keep launching the lie will turn into grotesque and venal cartoons, and corruption will dribble and leak and flood into their group. The ensuing destruction won’t be a cartoon. It’ll be all too real.

Along a similar line, the old adage about repetition of message in advertising is true; it has legs. But the people who keep launching it lose IQ points like children in an old USSR classroom. They wake up one day, and they’re androids and robots. Once they had college degrees. Now they’re alcoholics who have to look at their drivers’ licenses to make sure they remember their names and birth dates.

Understanding intelligent and creative attack takes time and work. But mostly it involves a shift of point of view. And a shift into a desire that was always there.

I look at people who do Attack Lite, and I see people who want to protect the position they already have. Nothing wrong with that, in theory, but what they already have is eating them up day by day. Degree by degree, blurred edge by edge, it’s sucking the life out of them. Their blood is drying up. They’re fronting for their own unchanging, personal status quo, and soon they’ll be a piece of paper blowing away in the wind.

There is another way to go, and it has both legs and wings.

Intelligent and creative attack.


exit from the matrix


Intelligent means: you have fact, you have truth, and you know what it is. You know it inside out. You can talk about it. You can write about it. You can persuade with it. You have unshakable conviction. You’re not locked up; far from it. The truth is alive. You can carry it and convey it with life.

Creative means imagination. You can devise and invent ways to present truth that stimulate not only a positive reaction in the audience, but a stirring of their own imagination, an awareness of a space that hasn’t been filled up yet, a space called the open and unwritten future.

And why would you want to do that? Because that’s what everyone is looking for, whether or not they’re consciously aware of it. Everyone wants to climb out of trench and Go. Everyone wants to travel through walls or knock them down.

Everyone wants to do that for themselves. And if you can help them and stimulate them, you’re in a vanguard nobody knows about and everybody is searching for.

Attack has very broad implications. It doesn’t only imply an opponent. It also means projection of new reality, it means power, energy, force, without mincing reluctance—as a sculptor attack stone.

It means something people have been carrying around in their minds and back pockets, looking for a way to unleash it with no holds barred.

And it has something to do with public relations, if you take apart the two words and see what they nakedly mean.

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.

Public relations outside the elite agencies

Public relations outside the elite agencies

by Jon Rappoport

October 31, 2015

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

“Public relations is all about coordinated actions over a sustained period of time. When it isn’t about that, you’re going to see a brief flame erupt and then die out, and you’re to see a great deal of time, energy, and money squandered on what could have been, but never will be.” (Notes for Discussions with Jack True, Jon Rappoport)

This is my second article on public relations. You can read the first one here.

In the past, I have had some critical things to say about PR efforts by non-mainstream groups.

Their work tends to be monochromatic. One-trick.

With knowledge, these groups could spend their money and time and energy more wisely.

When I consider taking on a client for PR work, I want to know if he can see his mission in terms of multiple vectors. This vision is essential, because coordinating various angles of approach is more effective than simply ringing the same bell over and over.

Two attitudes usually infect good and righteous causes, when they are forwarded from outside the establishment:

One: “We are the underdogs.”

Two: “We must convert mainstream people by matching what we say to what they can accept.”

Neither of these attitudes wins the day.

The first comes close to an admission of defeat; the second fails to realize that “what people can accept” is so superficial, trying to match it with PR will cause no more than a mild ripple in a pond.

Whether the PR campaign mainly concentrates on a flood of positive communication or an attack, the attitude needs to be very strong. It needs to project great energy.

In ads, a young bland woman walking toward the camera with a toothy smile, and a message that comes across like an operator standing by on the other end of an 800 number, isn’t going to do the trick.

There is currently a PR campaign underway (whose name I won’t mention), in which the desired audience is American mothers. The attitude is: “We have to be both polite and firm. We have to present them with objective facts, in order to change their minds.”

Perhaps that doesn’t sound too terrible, but I can assure you it will bring very few mothers into the fray on the side of the angels. They may agree with the PR messages, but they aren’t going to be motivated to do anything.

Net result: zero.

Likewise, polling target audiences is largely meaningless. It makes the PR people themselves look good, but that’s all.

Polling takes place in an artificial atmosphere: “I’m going to ask you a question, and then have you select, from four answers, your best choice…”

And what a polled audience thinks is their best choice, before and after a few rounds of really effective PR, will differ wildly.

PR for a good cause needs to deliver more than a message. It has to make a deep impact. Merely courting agreement comes up short.

Several years ago, I wrote a series of highly critical articles about the GMO “right to know what’s in your food” ballot initiative campaigns.

(To see two of these articles, go here and here. The complete archive is here.)

The leaders of the movement relied heavily on a number of polls, in which Americans repeatedly chose “right to know” as the preferred reason for wanting GMO labeling.

The ensuing TV ads taken out in several western states were mild and vapid.

Promises to educate people about the dangers of GMOs were never fulfilled across a broad spectrum of voters.

The leaders of the “right to know” movement had a plan: the ballot initiatives were the first step in what would later become a far more penetrating attack on Monsanto and the other biotech giants. But this attack has never materialized in a coordinated, timed, effective fashion.

The movement’s leaders, those who genuinely wanted to win, were lacking in the knowledge of how to operate a sustained PR campaign.

They spent a great deal of money on step one, and after that they began to react to Monsanto’s victories. Successful PR is not about reaction.

Authentic PR on behalf of a righteous cause changes many, many minds. Over time, it can turn a tide. At no point can those in charge back away and “do other things.” That would be the sign of a half-plan, a half-effort, and a great deal of confusion.

Then you’d begin to hear, “We’re under the gun, we need your help now more than ever,” and, “These are desperate times,” and “Step up now before it’s too late.”

Those statements are all versions of: “We’re the underdog.” Saying “underdog” may feel good, it may provoke sympathy, but it won’t win.


power outside the matrix


I admire anyone who is trying to lead a campaign for a cause that is noble, no matter how badly it is going, but when the objective is winning, knowledge about PR, up-front, is indispensable. It makes all the difference.

It turns ineffective actions into a plan that can have extraordinary results.

We are not talking about performance trophies for showing up. We’re talking about breaking the tape and crossing the finish line.

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.

The art of public relations, and why it matters

The art of public relations, and why it matters

by Jon Rappoport

October 30, 2015

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

“Most PR tries to program people’s beliefs. True PR wakes people up to the truth.” (Notes for The Matrix Revealed, Jon Rappoport)

When I handle public relations for a client, the first thing I decide is whether I agree with his objectives. If so, I proceed. If not, I bow out.

This initial vetting is the most important thing I do. Granted, it’s not the normal approach PR agencies take, but it is mine.

PR is the art of persuasion. When it uses true facts alongside goals whose fulfillment would benefit people, help lift them up, and make them more self-sufficient, you are deploying a potentially powerful force.

Three basic questions are:

What does the client want to accomplish? Toward what audience is the PR being directed? Who is opposed to the client’s goal?

Once these issues are understood and clarified, a PR campaign can be designed.

The campaign follows two paths. The first is the obvious route: releasing information that promotes the client’s goals; obtaining press exposure (alternative and mainstream); drumming up support for the client by reaching individuals and groups who can wield influence; and sometimes, going after opponents who would try to block success.

Another path is less traveled. It is asymmetrical. Assessing the overall situation reveals opportunities an active imagination can take advantage of:

For example, suppose we have a situation where a local population is under the gun, as a result of constant corporate toxic-pesticide spraying.

There are other such populations, in distant places, who are facing the same dire problem.

Bring half-a-dozen representatives of these other populations to the town or island of the original client. Hold press conferences highlighting the widespread global crisis. Stream live video to alt. news websites all over the world. Put on the pressure. Name the criminal corporation.

At the same time, have individuals from these populations file lawsuits against the corporation, and publicize them.

If corrupt judges dismiss the lawsuits as frivolous, or illegal, that simply adds grist for the mill. Publicize that. Make that the occasion for more PR.

At the same time, produce and release videos that relentlessly expose the corporation in every possible truthful way: its pesticides are toxic; the science on which these chemicals are based is flawed, false, and corrupt; the corporation colludes with government agencies to curry favor. Etc., etc.

At the same time, find people who have been injured by the corporation and release their on-camera testimonies.

Coordinate all these actions. Time them to work in concert with each other.

This is how a real PR campaign begins. It’s just the opening salvo.

Don’t play defense. Go on a sustained offensive thrust, from a number of different directions.

Note: Never, ever rely on just one strategy, such as a ballot initiative or a class-action lawsuit. If you do, you’re playing on the opponent’s turf, where he is the expert and can control outcomes. He knows you’re coming. He knows how to turn you away. But if you’re showing up from half-a-dozen directions at once, you’re a different kind of asymmetrical creature. Unpredictable, powerful, agile.

Or…suppose the client wants to build a private educational center where students can learn trades, like carpentry, plumbing, electrical repair.

You can predict a certain amount of opposition from the town council, because politicians and bureaucrats always find ways to gum up the works and stall proposals, licenses, and permits.

In this case, one strategy is to assemble and release a huge amount of positive PR extolling the project. Overwhelm some of the objections before they can get off the ground.

In PR releases, nail down all the specific positive benefits of the educational center.

At the same time, secure the endorsement of as many community leaders, groups, and visible figures as you can.

At the same time, hold public events at which speakers explain the project and its rewards for the community.

Don’t stop there. Expand your vision:

As an inventive wrinkle, indicate that this center can become a model/example for the rest of the country. When it’s up and running, you will invite leaders from many towns and cities to show up and study the center and its operations, first-hand, so they can implement them back home and create jobs. Local businesses will benefit as these visitors spend money.

Consider even wider implications. Suppose a handful of local successful businesses join the operation, offering to show out-of-town visitors how to operate similar businesses in their own towns and cities.

Local media will jump at the chance to cover this positive project.

Meet with town council members, and paint a picture for them—educate them on how they can cooperate to make the project a smashing success, and rightly enhance their own standing and reputation. “We want you to be the best town council in America.” Why not?

Again—coordinate all these actions, and make them the opening salvo in the PR campaign.

If serious opponents of your plan are there, they’ll soon show up, and you’ll see who they are, and you can take action to neutralize their efforts.

There is much more to PR campaigns than I’m sketching here, but you get the idea.

There is nothing wrong with PR, if it’s done for the right reasons.

Here is a basic underlying principle for you: “not the one, the many.” There are always people who want a good outcome for a project or enterprise or campaign, but they are married to the notion that one big tactic will win the day. That’s how they think.

Your response: let them do what they’re doing. It will have some publicity value.

But you are a proponent of the many. You don’t believe that one answer is the key. This isn’t a high-school math class, in which a word-problem has only a single bottom-line solution.

This is a multi-dimensional world.

Your opponent has a tank the size of the Empire State Building. Are you going to drive your little tank and meet his in the middle of Times Square? Is that a winning plan?

People who believe it might be are laboring under a delusion fostered by the very people who own the giant tank.

But you’re smarter.

You have imagination.

You can operate outside that matrix.


power outside the matrix


Since your principles are righteous and honorable, why not support them with strategies that stand a chance of winning?

Yes, in any campaign there is always the risk of losing, but that doesn’t mean you should adopt the attitude that you’re a heroic loser who “at least tried his best, against titanic odds.”

Adopting that attitude seals your fate from the get-go.

Actually increasing your chances of winning is much, much better.

The game is afoot. The stakes are high.

The game is never over.

The closer you come to winning, the more you realize you’re engaged in more than a game.

Much more.

You’re moving life up to another level.

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.

How public relations led the GMO-labeling movement astray

How public relations led the GMO-labeling movement astray

by Jon Rappoport

November 18, 2013

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

It apparently started with polls.

The men who wanted to bankroll ballot initiatives mandating GMO labeling hired pollsters.

The question was, what message would resonate with voters?

The original pollsters (perhaps as early as 2011) tested all sorts of messages: “you have a right to know what’s in your food” was one of them.

Other messages were tougher. For example, they mentioned the effects of GMOs on health.

In every poll, the one message that came out far ahead was “you have a right to know what’s in your food.”

In 2012, the Mellman Group ran a poll for the group, Just Label It. 91% of the 1000 voters surveyed said they wanted GMO labeling, which was interpreted as “consumers have a right to know what’s in their food.”

So that became the single mantra in California and the state of Washington, and the ballot measures in both places lost.

I have questions about the Mellman survey. Obtaining 91% agreement on anything under the sun should raise doubts. Who were the voters that were polled? What questions did the pollsters ask? How did they ask them? How many of the voters actually understood what GMOs are? Most importantly, how solid was that 91% when it came time for a barrage of TV ads during a political campaign?

Polls can test people’s reactions to bland questions, but these reactions give you no clue about how they would respond if the issue were presented forcefully.

For example, you could ask people, “Are you concerned that GMO crops will affect small farmers?” Assuming these people even understand the connection between GMOs and farmers’ livelihoods is a major stretch.

So the people say, “No, I’m not motivated by that issue.”

But suppose you ran a TV ad in which a salt-of-the-earth farmer was standing on a barren piece of land, the camera zoomed in on him, and he showed his callused and worn hands to the audience and said:

“I am an American farmer. I’ve been on this land forty years. My family has been on this land every day for a hundred and fifty years. I’m a human being just like you. My relationship with Monsanto and their genetically engineered food ruined my farm, my future, and my life…”

You could make that ad (conveying the truth) knock people off their couches.

Then, if you asked those television viewers whether they thought GMO food and farmers’ livelihoods was an important issue, you’d get a completely different answer.

On an issue like GMO food, polls don’t really tell the story.

Suppose you had this TV ad: a mother and her little child stand on their lawn in front of the camera. The mother says, “See the rashes and lesions on my son’s body? Do you know where he got them? From the weed killer we sprayed out of a bottle. It’s called Roundup. It’s made by Monsanto. Do you want this for your child?”

You’ve got the beginning of a powerful and true piece of information, delivered in a way that goes beyond the impact of any poll question about chemicals and food.

Unfortunately, the men who bankrolled Prop 37 and 522 in CA and WA took the poll data at face value. They settled for “the right to know what’s in your food” and stopped there.

They thought they had a winner, the only winner.

They need to go back to the drawing board. They have to knock off those bland TV ads they ran in CA and WA and realize they have the opportunity to achieve something much greater.

They can show people the truth about Monsanto and cause the kind of outcome they’ve been hoping for.

If they have the courage for that kind of fight.

GMO labeling alone is not going to add up to a victory in the struggle against Monsanto. Some proponents of labeling admit this. They say, “But you see, we’re educating people about GMOs in the process.”

Well, do you want to really make an impact on people or do you just want to mess around? If you’re serious, forget the polls and the pollsters. Start producing TV ads that bite. Bite hard.

Use your money to detonate a real explosion in consciousness.


the matrix revealed


Here is the bottom line. The issue of food has two sides. On the one hand, you build an alternative universe in which people grow and sell and buy food that is sustaining and healthy. On the other hand, you attack the criminals who are degrading and poisoning the food supply.

One without the other doesn’t work.

TV ads must, and I mean must, attack Monsanto and the other big food-tech giants.

Gary Hirshberg, the CEO of Stonyfield Organic, is a founding partner of the Just Label It group which commissioned the Mellman poll. Of all the leaders in the labeling movement, Hirshberg is the most overtly political.

During the 2008 presidential campaign season, his home in New Hampshire was a mandatory stop for candidates. Hirshberg’s first choice for the Democratic nomination was Tom Vilsack until he dropped out of the race. Hirshberg hosted gatherings for John Edwards and Barack Obama, and eventually decided to support Obama.

Vilsack, of course, became the Secretary of Agriculture under President Obama. Vilsack is a staunch supporter of GMO food. During his term as governor of Iowa, Vilsack was given a Governor of the Year award by the Biotechnology Industry Organization.

Vilsack was an odd choice for Hirshberg to support for president, to say the least.

Hirshberg is the author of Stirring It Up: How to Make Money and Save the World. It’s safe to say he views revolution-by-the-consumer as an exceedingly powerful force.

I’m sure the Mellman poll confirmed his position that “right to know what’s in your food,” and GMO labeling, could tilt the marketplace against Monsanto.

It may be pretty to think so, but giving American consumers a clear choice about whether to buy GMO or non-GMO food, through labeling, isn’t, all by itself, going to push Monsanto up against the wall.

For that, an all-out attack is necessary. And it doesn’t doesn’t take a genius to pick the medium: TV ads.

The objective? To make Monsanto’s threat to health and life and liberty very real and very personal. To make that threat as imminent as it was when millions of students, in the 1960s, saw the military draft as their ticket to going to Vietnam to die.

After you’ve aired a few thousand plays of such attack ads against Monsanto, then you can do polls. Then you’ll see what people believe and think and feel in a new light.

Hirshberg serves as a co-chairman of an organization called AGree. Its objective is to “build consensus around solutions” to “critical issues facing the food and agriculture system.” As researcher Nick Brannigan has pointed out, AGree includes, among its foundation partners: the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation.

It would be hard to find foundations more friendly to big corporate agriculture and GMOs. No doubt Hirshberg would say somebody has to walk into the lions’ den and try to change the system from the inside.

If that is his mission, it’s not surprising that he would support watered-down political ads that encourage GMO leveling, while failing to make a deeper impact on the public mind.

The labeling movement should be enlisting artists of all kinds to make ads that move people, that attack the poisoners of the food supply, that hold up to ridicule the corporate agenda of monopolizing and degrading the food of this planet.

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.