What is "Vector"?

I would greatly appreciate a definition for "Vector."

As I understand it now, it means something loaded with "spin", poisoned/tainted with a false message; (i.e.: Propagandized)

So, if a newspaper article was heavily slanted, I could say it was "vectored."

Is this correct, IP? Thanks!

This is a big and important topic. Let me start to address it by posting some of my miscellanous notes below, but this thread should undergo thorough discussion.

Vector Summary

In summary, a Vector is a "false construct" created by information operations (IO) actors in order to (mis)lead the public down a path that will not allow the public to obstruct the goals of the social planners.

For those interested in vectoring (or, sometimes referred to as framing) please watch this video where pollsters (including Frank Luntz) discuss how they manipulate using "frames"

Science of Manipulation
http://www.mapdigital.com/orwell/session_2.html?odm=archive&speed=high

Use of vectors give one group the ability to frame issues differently than another group. Social manipulators sell what they want to one side of a dialectic by employing a given frame, then sell different information to the other side of the dialectic using a conflicting frame. Use of these techniques segments the audience and keeps segmented these participants voluntarily separated so they don't talk with each other unsupervised. Social manipulators and vector leaders then program and charge-up trigger words for each side....teaching each vector to speak their own language....which happens to be full of trigger words that trigger a negative reaction to those on the other side of the dialectic or in another vector.

Vector-leaders, and their role

Vector-leaders are media actors tasked to appeal to a particular segment of the public (vector-followers), keeping their view of the world within a particularly defined frame, or set of vectors. Vector-leaders capture vector-followers and develop trust relationships that stifle the follower's critical thinking and maintain a narrow perceptions that are dialectically opposed to other vectored groups.

Vector Omission is one technique employed

There are lots of ways Vectors are employed to manipulate the audience,, but many times the vector-leader simply leaves-out critical facts or only reveals segments of the bigger picture. This ommission can materially alter ones perception of their world, and thereby the vector-leader can manipulate without technically "lying."

Containment Vector as another popular technique

A containment vector is one in which the information that is provided may be true, but the information is misleading in that it only articulates a subset of the known reality to its audience. Any evidence that is brought forth that demonstrates that the entire story is not being told is ignored and dismissed, with the truth tellers vehemently denounced. So, this is the consistent omission of critical information, where the critical information would clearly move the control group outside its prescribed role in a specific dialectic.

JBS frequently uses "Containment Vectors" to limit its
audience's view of the world, and they employ this technique in a very
consistent manners so as to maintain their anti-thesis frame in the
Communist versus Democracy dialectic.

ScoutsHonor wrote:

As I understand it now, it means something loaded with "spin", poisoned/tainted with a false message; (i.e.: Propagandized)

First, the actual message of a Vector may not necessarily be false, but it deliberately creates a false understanding or view. It's design is to manipulate its intended (and usally, very specific) audience, that's the primary goal. In many cases, the manipulation is designed so that various audiences, who are all uniquely manipulated, will oppose each other - form a dialectical opposition. The net result is that each audience is mislead and fighting with other audiences who have also been mislead.

ScoutsHonor wrote:

So, if a newspaper article was heavily slanted, I could say it was "vectored."

Yes. But the key here is to identy the audience that they are trying to manipulate, how they are trying to maniplate them and the goal? Usually, you'll be able to find media that services other audiences, telling their audience the same story but with different manipulation.

Co-opting a Vector
aka. Usurping a Vector, Discrediting a Vector, Marginalizing a Vector

So, let's say you want to discredit some Vector. The vector could be anything, even an opposition discussion about an elite establishment. To do this, to discredit that discussion, one must first control the discussion. So, people who are under COINTEL control ("controlled assets") are placed at the forefront of this issue, which we sometimes refer to as controlled opposition. In the case of seeking to discredit opposition discussion, controlled assets are employed who maybe perceived as nutcases, not-politically-correct, or simply abhorrent.

So, let's take the example of the Frankfurt School of Social Research, which has devised many modern techniques of societal control and manipulation. Let's say we want to discuss and critique the Frankfurt School for what it is, a fascist think tank for the elite devising scientific techniques of control, such at Adorno's Dialectic of Mass Enlightenment [which is basically using the culture industry (music, movies, tv) to indoctrinate the public].

In order to co-opt, and ultimately marginalize, the Vector (which we've defined as opposition talk about the Frankfurt School), the social engineers will seek to thwart any intellectual, and non-loaded discussion critiquing the school. To implement this, they will use people like AJ, Stormfront, Rense, or some run-of-the-mill Neo-Nazi to discuss the opposition points. That controlled asset's responsibility will be to own that vector, and to get tremendous publicity as the owner of that vector. Then the vector, which in this case is any discussion or critique against the Frankfurt School, becomes link with AJ, Stormform, or some neo-nazi group, inheriting whatever "cooties" those controlled assets have in society. Essentially, the message is linked with the messenger, and as the messenger is highly loaded and controversial, therefore the message becomes highly loaded and highly controversial.

Now imagine you are at a cocktail party and want to discuss the Frankfurt School in some intelligent way with others at the party, others who may listen to Patriot or Alternative radio but do not investigate beyond what they are told by these supposed alternative media sources. So, as you engage in this conversation (ie. this vector), someone who has only heard that Stormfront is against the Frankfurt School is likely to ask if you are one of those neo-nazi nutcasess. With this question, the conversation immediately become highly loaded, and you will find yourself having to dig yourself out of a hole before you can even engage in an intelligent conversation. Unfortunately, and most likely, you will drop the issue for fear that you will be branded a neo-nazi nutcase.

This is why people like A.J. must be on the forefront of issues. This is why AJ, and others like him, is so critical to opposition control. It is why AJ had to have Ron Paul on his show first, and often. It was essential that A.J. retain primary ownership over the Ron Paul vector, and over many other critical vectors as well. With that control, A.J. was able to manipulate the vectors [he controls] in any which way he desires, and the mainstream media can cover the co-opted vector, along with AJ, in order to extend the message to mainstream audiences.

C1 wrote:

Co-opting a Vector
aka. Usurping a Vector, Discrediting a Vector, Marginalizing a Vector

So, let's say you want to discredit some Vector. The vector could be anything, even an opposition discussion about an elite establishment. To do this, to discredit that discussion, one must first control the discussion. So, people who are under COINTEL control ("controlled assets") are placed at the forefront of this issue, which we sometimes refer to as controlled opposition. In the case of seeking to discredit opposition discussion, controlled assets are employed who maybe perceived as nutcases, not-politically-correct, or simply abhorrent.

So, let's take the example of the Frankfurt School of Social Research, which has devised many modern techniques of societal control and manipulation. Let's say we want to discuss and critique the Frankfurt School for what it is, a fascist think tank for the elite devising scientific techniques of control, such at Adorno's Dialectic of Mass Enlightenment [which is basically using the culture industry (music, movies, tv) to indoctrinate the public].

In order to co-opt, and ultimately marginalize, the Vector (which we've defined as opposition talk about the Frankfurt School), the social engineers will seek to thwart any intellectual, and non-loaded discussion critiquing the school. To implement this, they will use people like AJ, Stormfront, Rense, or some run-of-the-mill Neo-Nazi to discuss the opposition points. That controlled asset's responsibility will be to own that vector, and to get tremendous publicity as the owner of that vector. Then the vector, which in this case is any discussion or critique against the Frankfurt School, becomes link with AJ, Stormform, or some neo-nazi group, inheriting whatever "cooties" those controlled assets have in society. Essentially, the message is linked with the messenger, and as the messenger is highly loaded and controversial, therefore the message becomes highly loaded and highly controversial.

Now imagine you are at a cocktail party and want to discuss the Frankfurt School in some intelligent way with others at the party, others who may listen to Patriot or Alternative radio but do not investigate beyond what they are told by these supposed alternative media sources. So, as you engage in this conversation (ie. this vector), someone who has only heard that Stormfront is against the Frankfurt School is likely to ask if you are one of those neo-nazi nutcasess. With this question, the conversation immediately become highly loaded, and you will find yourself having to dig yourself out of a hole before you can even engage in an intelligent conversation. Unfortunately, and most likely, you will drop the issue for fear that you will be branded a neo-nazi nutcase.

This is why people like A.J. must be on the forefront of issues. This is why AJ, and others like him, is so critical to opposition control. It is why AJ had to have Ron Paul on his show first, and often. It was essential that A.J. retain primary ownership over the Ron Paul vector, and over many other critical vectors as well. With that control, A.J. was able to manipulate the vectors [he controls] in any which way he desires, and the mainstream media can cover the co-opted vector, along with AJ, in order to extend the message to mainstream audiences.

How would you classify the *exclusion* of a topic, such as the Gulf Oil Spill, for example, from a General Politics forum? Is this not called "gatekeeping"?? It seems to be a sort of reverse vector, in that instead of targeting a particular group with a propagandized message, it makes light of its importance [de-targetizes it?] and then 'disappears' it thus KEEPING IT entirely AWAY from general attention....NOT a pretty sight, I might add.

Explorer wrote:

How would you classify the *exclusion* of a topic, such as the Gulf Oil Spill, for example, from a General Politics forum? Is this not called "gatekeeping"?? It seems to be a sort of reverse vector, in that instead of targeting a particular group with a propagandized message, it makes light of its importance [de-targetizes it?] and then 'disappears' it thus KEEPING IT entirely AWAY from general attention....NOT a pretty sight, I might add.

I'd call that "running containment", or executing a "Containment Vector". It's very common.

Where is that happening, Explorer?

So, 'G' was running containment when he didn't release the Dodd interview?

C1 wrote:

Explorer wrote:

How would you classify the *exclusion* of a topic, such as the Gulf Oil Spill, for example, from a General Politics forum? Is this not called "gatekeeping"?? It seems to be a sort of reverse vector, in that instead of targeting a particular group with a propagandized message, it makes light of its importance [de-targetizes it?] and then 'disappears' it thus KEEPING IT entirely AWAY from general attention....NOT a pretty sight, I might add.

I'd call that "running containment", or executing a "Containment Vector". It's very common.

Ah. Thanks much, C1.

incognito wrote:

Where is that happening, Explorer?

So, 'G' was running containment when he didn't release the Dodd interview?

Exactly.

It is so very hard to detect. The asset who executes containment then releases the information later, and is therefore viewed by the public as the one who is to be trusted, and even defended by the public.

What's so sad is that they generally co-opt and skew the vector upon its release, but no one knows because they have no baseline of "truth" to compare the skewed vector with.

Hence, the don't know that the vectors was originally contained nor do they understand that it is being skewed. All they know is that a vector is being distributed and sold as a "revelation".

Hah! Like every news piece we get, anywhere!