In the 1996 national political
conventions, ABC television unveiled
what it called the latest
``breakthrough'' in polling--the
``Insta-poll.'' A small ``focus group''
of selected individuals, supposedly a
statistically valid demographic
representation of the American
population, sat in a room watching live
telecasts of the Dole and Clinton
acceptance speeches. In their hands,
they held a rheostat-like device with
which they registered their pleasure or
displeasure with statements made by the
candidate as he was speaking. These
responses were fed into a computer,
which then converted the aggregate
responses into graphic representations,
fluctuating on the screen as opinions
instantly changed. The ABC commentators
proclaimed that this ``new'' technology
enabled them to break down the speech,
to analyze what parts of it ``played in
Peoria.'' [1]
Graphic representations aside, the
technology was hardly new. Some 60
years ago, a similar device had been
developed as part of a Rockefeller
Foundation-funded project, using the
U.S. networks of Freudian brainwashers
from the Frankfurt School's Institute
for Social Research [2], and other
operatives allied with the London
Tavistock Institute, to study radio's
impact on society and its potential for
mass brainwashing. Directing the
so-called Radio Research Project, based
at Princeton University, was one of the
fathers of public opinion polling, Paul
Lazersfeld, along with three others who
were to become prominent in that
``black art'': the Tavistock-linked
Gordon Allport, from Harvard; Hadley
Cantril, who established one of the
leading polling-profiling operations
out of Princeton; and Frank Stanton,
then the director of research for the
CBS radio network, who was later to
rise to head CBS's News Division, and
still later to head both CBS network
and the RAND Corporation.
The crowning achievement of the
Radio Research Project was the
Stanton-Lazersfeld Program Analyzer,
the so-called ``Little Annie''--a
rheostat-like device with which test
audiences could register the intensity
of their likes and dislikes of radio
programs, or commercials, on a
moment-to-moment basis; the
brainwashers were able to determine
what particular characters or
situations produced the desired,
momentary feeling states in the target
audience. [3]
In The Beginning...
All public opinion polling has its
origins in ``sociometrics,'' or
statistical sociology, as developed in
the early part of this century by
Frankfurt School-linked operatives,
including Max Weber. [4] It is
based, as with ABC's Insta-Poll, or the
Radio Research Project's ``Little
Annie,'' on the measurement of
momentary feeling states, or
opinions, on given subjects. This
provides a detailed profile of the
prejudices and assumptions of a
targetted population; as such, polls
can be useful for mass brainwashing
campaigns to shift opinions to those
desired by those who run them. The mass
media, as they developed through this
century, from print, to radio, to
television, became the principal
vehicles for the promotion of such
shifts.
Creative thinking defies
measurement in quantifiable terms. It
is impossible to come up with a
statistical correlation, based on
polling, that could determine whether
one creative idea is better or more
valid than another, whether it can be
accepted by society as useful,
important, or true. As those involved
with the Radio Research Project, and
such American pollsters as George
Gallup and Lou Harris, or Elmo Roper,
``proved,'' opinions can be
easily counted; other-directed
Americans, always concerned about what
their neighbors think, as determinant
of what they should think about given
subjects, were shown to be readily
susceptible to manipulation by poll
results, accepting the poll numbers as
true, and being guided in their own
actions by the perceived ``majority
opinion.''
Polling of the type that most
Americans are familiar with began in
the 1930s, becoming featured material
on radio and in newspapers. At that
time, most polls were conducted by
national polling agencies, such as
Gallup, Roper, or Harris, with
specialized contracting handled through
Cantril's operation at Princeton and,
later, Allport's at Harvard. By the
late 1940s and early 1950s, the key
U.S. nodes of Tavistock were conducting
specialized polling operations, under
contract from government agencies and
the private sector. In the 1960s, the
television and radio networks linked up
with major newspapers, such as the
Washington Post and the New York
Times, to run their own polling
operations; they are now a staple of
the nightly television news broadcasts
on all networks, including the cable
news channels, such as CNN. [5]
Shifting Policy
There has always been a more
covert, secret side to these polling
operations. The results of the Radio
Research Project had demonstrated the
effectiveness of public opinion polling
for profiling populations, to
determine their subjective weaknesses,
for purposes of manipulation. This was
put to work during World War II, as
Tavistock-linked brainwashers conducted
extensive polling of the enemy,
and allied populations,
operating from the Army's Psychological
Warfare Directorate and the Committee
on National Morale, to determine the
effectiveness of brainwashing
propaganda. [6] The findings became
the basis of detailed country and
regional population profiles that were
used by the British oligarchy and its
American lackeys to shape post-World
War II policy. [7]
Immediately after World War II,
the most extensive profiling of the
American population to date took place
under the auspices of a project run
jointly through the Tavistock-Frankfurt
School networks, ostensibly to study
``prejudice'' in the United States. The
study, whose most notorious volume was
titled The Authoritarian
Personality, was used to promote
the still widely-held belief that
fascism derives from certain
``personality types,'' and its quack
measurements and description of this
personality type have since been used
to target any enemy of British policy
interests. [8] The database
assembled from the tens of thousands of
interviews, provided a compilation of
manipulable proclivities and fears of
Americans, that was used in the
following decades. [9]
Another major polling-profiling
operation was undertaken by Tavistock
networks in the 1960s, under a NASA
grant, ostensibly to examine the impact
of the space program on the population.
The findings of the semi-secret
Rapoport Report, of which only one
volume was published, found that the
space program had produced a
``dangerous'' outbreak of cultural
optimism and belief in the capability
of creative scientific thinking to
solve problems; this was dangerous to
the British policy of
post-industrialism, then beginning to
be implemented. [10] The
reports, which found their way into the
highest policy circles of the British
Empire, led to a decision to shut down
the U.S. space program as rapidly as
possible, even as it was achieving its
crowning success with the 1969 manned
lunar landing.
To build public support for this
shutdown of the space program, starting
in that same period, an effort was
launched through public opinion
polling, by agencies such as Gallup and
Harris, and promoted in the media,
including television, to ``show'' that
Americans were opposed to the continued
expenditures for manned space flight;
the fraudulent results of these polls
helped shape the 1970-72 election
campaigns, in which such a scale-back
was debated. [11]
Big Business
Today, public opinion polling is a
multibillion-dollar industry, involving
tens of thousands of operatives, and
hundreds of thousands of polls
annually. Aside from the daily
appearance of poll results in the print
and electronic media, corporate and
other business leaders use polls to
guide their decisions on everything
from when to best announce layoffs, to
what color next year's cars should
be. [12] Political figures, from
the President on down, unfortunately
rely on polls and pollsters to
determine what they should say and how
they should act; in the most recent
election campaign, approximately 15% of
the vast sums of money spent went to
pollsters and their
analysts. [13]
``Polls prove that people are
stupid,'' said Hal Becker, who headed
the Connecticut-based Futures Group, an
outfit which specialized in
sophisticated polling of the U.S. and
other national populations.
``If you
want an American to believe something,
then all you have to do is get a poll
taken that says it is so (and believe
me, that is an easy thing to do, if you
know how), and then get it publicized.
You can tell somebody the Moon is made
of green cheese--if the poll numbers
say it is so, then the jerk reading
them or watching them on the boob tube
will believe it. Guaranteed.''
Becker made those comments in
1981. They are just as true today.
However, no matter how many people
believe that something is true, this
doesn't make it true, but only the
prevailing opinion. Ted
Turner, the media magnate now conjoined
with Time-Warner, believes that the
future of U.S. politics lies in the
instant polling of Americans, which he
calls the ultimate form of
participatory democracy; new forms of
interactive cable and the Internet, he
says, will make all this
possible. [14] He is not alone
in such professed beliefs; a 1991
Tavistock-initiated study on, among
other things, new forms of world
government, reached a similar
conclusion. [15] Our Founding
Fathers, in their infinite wisdom,
designed a Republican government, based
on seeking the truth, and resisting the
whims of ill-informed or manipulated
``mass democracy.'' We have already
come too far down the path plowed by
the pollsters, and their backers such
as Turner--a path which leads straight
to fascism.
Notes
- [return to text]
While the commentators had clearly
hoped for some dramatic results, the
graphic data showed hardly any
``connection'' between the focus group,
split between ``Democrats,''
``Republicans,'' and ``Independents,''
and the acceptance speeches: The graphs
were mostly horizontal lines, similar
to the ``flatliner'' readings of the
vital signs of dead patients.
- [return to text]
See Michael Minnicino, ``The New
Dark Age: The Frankfurt School and
`Political Correctness,'|''
Fidelio, Winter 1992.
- [return to text]
To this day, CBS maintains ``program
analyzer'' capabilities in both New
York and Hollywood; other networks and
production studios use similar devices.
It is said that they correlate 85% to
A.C. Nielsen polling-ratings for
television viewership.
- [return to text]
While the concept of public opinion
was discussed during the last century,
the idea of statistically measuring it
with polls is new to the 20th century.
The first interpretive public opinion
poll was conducted in 1912, with the
advice of Max Weber, to determine for a
German trade union leader what his
members thought about certain subjects,
so that he could take the position on
them that the majority would favor.
- [return to text]
It was Frank Stanton who introduced
polling as a component of the ``Evening
News'' during his reign at CBS.
- [return to text]
One of the key profiling operations
revolved around the study of war bond
sales, and the effectiveness of the
various promotional campaigns. Among
its findings, was that the American
population had little belief in
anything that political figures said,
with the exception of President
Franklin Roosevelt; however, they
tended to look favorably upon the same
statements made by movie stars and
similar figures of popular culture.
- [return to text]
Some of the results of the polling
was published in journals, such as
Public Opinion Quarterly,
edited by Cantril, and directed toward
pollsters and their controllers. These
and other classified data revealed that
Americans, while still fearing
``communism,'' looked forward toward
working with Russia as a
continuing ally in President
Roosevelt's proposed postwar ``grand
design'' for peace and prosperity.
There was also a great deal of distrust
of the colonial powers, most notably
the British Empire, and support for a
policy of emancipation for all colonial
peoples, and an accompanying economic
improvement--provided that American
prosperity could be insured; the
overriding fear of a new depression was
noted, as well. After Roosevelt's
death, British-inspired efforts split
the potential alliance between the
Russians and the United States, and a
new wave of anti-communist hysteria was
cranked up leading to the obscenity of
McCarthyism. Simultaneously, the
country was plunged into a new
depression, and its profiled response
had Americans retreating into their own
fearful lives, giving up, for that
crucial moment, the hopes for a better
world, free of colonialism, that had
been inspired by Roosevelt and the
victory over fascism.
- [return to text]
The Anti-Defamation League of B'nai
B'rith and the British-controlled and
-influenced U.S. media have used this
method against Lyndon LaRouche.
- [return to text]
Interestingly, Frankfurt
School-directed profiling of the German
population in the 1930s found that
anti-Semitism was not a feature of the
German character, that Germany was not
anti-Semitic as a nation, nor was
anti-Semitism even the most important
feature of Nazism. Those findings
proved a great embarrassment, that had
to be covered up, for the
``authoritarian personality'' hoax to
play out.
- [return to text]
A portion of the so-called Rapoport
Report was published under the title,
Social Change: Space Impact on
Communities and Social Groups (see
also EIR, Jan. 12, 1996, ``The
Tavistock Roots of the `Aquarian
Conspiracy'|'').
- [return to text]
The cited polls usually asked
questions that compared expenditures
for the space program to funds needed
for mass transit, new housing, and
similar ``down to earth'' programs. At
first, there was no direct question
about support for the space program
itself, or even for the lunar landing;
those questions were asked later, after
the initial poll results were
publicized, and after various
``scientists'' were brought into public
view to claim that unmanned space
exploration was the cheaper and more
effective use of funds. Never was
anyone told about the vast benefits to
the domestic economy caused directly
and indirectly by the Apollo program.
- [return to text]
Walter Lippmann's associate at the
British Wellington House psychological
warfare unit during World War I,
Sigmund Freud's nephew Eduard Bernays,
was the first to emphasize the value of
polling data for determining public
taste. Bernays is generally regarded as
the father of ``Madison Avenue''
advertising.
- [return to text]
Much of the political polling is
complete fabrication. As some of the
work of Roy Cohn-linked Dick Morris
demonstrated, it is intended to
manipulate candidates into spending
money for media, with the appropriate
kickbacks to the pollsters.
- [return to text]
Turner's partner, Warner
Communications, had experimented with
mass interactive democracy during the
1980s, using its interactive cable
system, Qube, to provide instant
referenda for local governments.
- [return to text]
The 1989-91 Case Western
Reserve-directed study on mass
participatory democracy, proposed using
technology that became the Internet, as
a mechanism for doing away with the
nation-state. See EIR, May
24, 1996, ``Tavistock's Imperial
Brainwashing Project.''
- The Media Cartel That Controls What You Think, by L. Wolfe,
The American Almanac,, May 5, 1997.
- The Cartelization of the Media, by Jeffrey Steinberg, The
American Almanac,, May 5, 1997.
-
Direct British Control of the U.S. Media, The American
Almanac,, May 5, 1997.
- Brainwashing: How The British Use the Media For Mass Psychological
Warfare, by L. Wolfe, The American Almanac,, May 5, 1997.
-
British "Fellow Travellers" Control Major U.S. Media, by
Jeffrey Steinberg, The American Almanac,, May 5, 1997.
-
Tavistock's Language Project: The Origin of "Newspeak",
The American Almanac,, May 5, 1997.
The preceding article is a rough version of the article that appeared in
The American Almanac. It is made available here with the permission of The New
Federalist Newspaper. Any use of, or quotations from, this article must attribute them to The
New Federalist, and The American Almanac.
EIR Issue: Who Controls the Media?,
$10.00.
Readings from the American Almanac. Contact us at: american_almanac@yahoo.com.