https://ashmedai.substack.com/p/the-complete-idiots-guide-to-cooking?open=false#%C2%A7section-vi-control-the-standards-of-evidence

This is a ‘First Edition’ - it’s still a bit of a work in progress :)

“This work is truly a masterpiece of Soviet scholarship. It is so good in fact that I had the author sent to a Siberian Gulag in order that I could claim authorship.”

-- Joseph Stalin

“The Idiots Guide to Cooking Data for Aspiring Propagandists is required reading for all WEF Young Leader’s Program indoctrinates. I can think of no higher praise.”

-- Klaus Schwab

“As you know, I am Science. But if you want to know how Science is made, look no further than this brilliant, highly researched and purely evidence-based publication. I even have a copy on my nightstand signed by President Xi that he gave me to celebrate the opening of the Wuhan Institute of Virology!!”

-- Dr. Anthony Fauci

“I can attest from my personal experience that everything in this book is true. Safe and effective, as you Americans like to say. How do you think I now have more money than Elon Musk??”

-- President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Democratic Nation of Ukraine

“Study protocols should be designed following the guidelines of The Idiot’s Guide to Cooking Data in order to maximize the impact of the study.”

-- Excerpt from CDC Internal Memo ‘Re: MMWR Optimal Study Design’

Take a close look at the above slide from an international poll conducted a few months after covid struck: This is what effective propaganda looks like. And the true effect was even greater, because the ‘real world’ numbers used to calculate how badly people exaggerated the risks of covid were of course themselves derived from. . . the world’s preeminent propaganda organizations (masquerading as public health agencies). Who were themselves already wildly exaggerating the risks of covid.

The art of effective propaganda is an encompassing discipline that requires careful and thorough study -- and review -- from time to time. For the beginner, it can be very difficult to master. Even the experienced propagandist can at times fall into the trap of thinking that creating & disseminating propaganda is a straightforward enterprise - which is a good way to win a permanent all-expenses paid Siberian vacation. It is not usually so simple a task to befuddle the entire society every day, 365 days a year, indefinitely.

The following short guidebook will provide the aspiring propagandist, WEF lackey, Communist Apparatchik, Woke Marxist, and seasoned government bureaucrat alike with the tools and knowledge necessary to develop their promising talent into full-bloom mastery of the art of propaganda.

This book is a bit long!! So don’t feel as though you must read it start to finish in one shot, for that is a recipe to burnout & to not retain the critical information contained within.

This manual is divided into the following sections:

Section I. Definitions - How to redefine words, terms, and metrics to keep them in line with the regime narrative

Section II. Curating Data - How to hijack the processes of recording, reporting and publishing data

Section III. Vetting which data are considered to be part of Official Science - How to vet and data and dispose of regime non-conforming data so it never appears in any Official Science or regime datasets

Section IV. How to rig a study - Exactly what it sounds like

Section V. Doctoring the datasets - Sometimes, you will need to go in and do a little data ‘surgery’ to modify the content of databases that contradict regime talking points you can’t simply eradicate

Section VI. Control the standards of evidence - How to set up a hierarchy of evidence that puts regime-friendly Science at the top and regime-unfriendly science at the bottom (of the Marianna Trench)

Section VII. The Ecclesiastical Authorities of Science - How to ensure that Scientific Authorities reliably parrot the regime’s facts and narratives

Afterword - Tying it all up nicely, like one of Peter Hotez’s bowties (he’s a particularly grating Regime Celebrity Scientist)

“He who controls the language controls the masses”
-- Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals

How we define concepts or categories determines what tidbit of the real world they communicate or represent - or what they don’t communicate or represent.

Malleable definitions, and an arbitrary and capricious standard for assigning definitions, are an absolute must for any effective propagandist. Despite the best efforts, even seasoned, expert propagandists will inevitably confront situations where the curated data that exists, or people’s lived experience, are problematic to the official regime narrative.

Effective propaganda therefore requires the capacity for nimble and highly adaptive flexibility to control the content of data, especially pre-existing conventional metrics that the public is accustomed to hearing about which are notoriously difficult to simply make disappear (unlike the ease by which you can vanish a dissident scientist off of YouTube or Facebook). For example, you won’t be able to avoid talking about “deaths” in the context of a novel Dreaded Disease Pandemic - the primary way people will relate to gauging the severity of a disease will always be first and foremost “how many people died from the disease”. But you can change what “death” refers to in the context of the novel Dreaded Disease if you want to increase or decrease people’s sense of how deadly it is.

In practice, this means that when the normal understanding of a term or concept shows that the reality does not quite fit the regime’s desired narrative, just change a few definitions and voilà, problem solved.

As many a prominent communist propagandist throughout history has also observed, “He who controls the language rules the world”.

There are a variety of ways to alter or transition definitions from problematic to acceptable:

If the conventional definition of something includes concepts, data or information that is at odds with regime dogma, limit the definition so it no longer includes the unwanted information. There are plenty of ways to do this. So we’ll list a few of the more common types of characteristics you can use to effectively limit a definition:

1. Limit the definition by time interval: Suppose that vaccinated people get the Dreaded Disease at very high rates in the first 30 days following vaccination, and after 90+ days from vaccination, with the Glorious Vaccine. This is a big problem, because people will think that the Glorious Vaccine is not effective:

   

The red line shows the case rate per million people after getting vaccinated with the Glorious Vaccine, by the number of days since vaccination. As you can see, in the first 30 days, the rate of breakthrough infections is very high, but between days 30-90 the case rate is practically 0, and after day 90 the case rate starts climbing again.

In plain English, what you see on the above chart is that the number of cases per million people goes as follows:

1. Before vaccination: 500 cases of Dreaded Disease / million people

2. 10 days after vaccination: 3,000 cases of Dreaded Disease / million people

3. 20 days after vaccination: 1,700 cases of Dreaded Disease / million people

4. 30 days after vaccination: 100 cases per million people

That’s very inglorious efficacy for the Glorious Vaccine - something that cannot be allowed to stand. One solution is to simply change the definition of ‘vaccinated’ to mean someone who is between 30 & 90 days after being injected with the Glorious Vaccine - in other words, anyone who is within 30 days of being vaccinated, or after 90 days from vaccination, is not considered ‘vaccinated’:

This particular tactic was pioneered by pretty much every public health agency in the civilized world, where the definition of ‘fully vaccinated’ for the covid vaccines was limited to “14 days after your second dose”:

Limit the definition by quantity, such as the number of exposures - for instance, if a bunch of people who received 1 dose or 5 doses of the Miraculous Treatment 🌈Mirafaucivir🌈 died (the first dose kills off people who are particularly susceptible to its toxicity, and 5 doses is too toxic for pretty much anyone), limit the definition of ‘treated with MiraFaucivir’ to between 2-4 doses:

Limit a definition by adding absurd conditions into the definition that are almost impossible to fulfill. For instance, you might try using the following conditions to limit the definition of a ‘vaccine death’ in the context of a mass vaccination campaign with the newly-minted Glorious Vaccine:

It’s pretty hard to ever manage to get a ‘confirmed’ case of someone dying from the Glorious Vaccine under conditions like these.

(You must remember to obstruct autopsies as much as possible to make this example definition fully effective.)

MUCH MORE at the link: The Complete Idiot's Guide to Cooking Data for Aspiring Propagandists Gaslighting made easy