Rules of Engagement - Integrity, Civility and Discipline.
This is the only way we are going to stand a chance at retaining our rights as our Country continues its shift. We are completely out "gunned" in terms of media messaging. Our opposition is a lot more clever, well organized and well funded than most dare admit (see last election if in doubt).
I watched Piers Morgan last night and couldn't sleep very well after (good thread describing here). I believe this type of presentation will be their playbook going forward.
1 - Attempt to demonstrate the existence of a crisis: They will parade around the poor people who suffered through unspeakable horrors. They will string multiple horrific events together into very large segments to make the sum greater than its parts. They will cherry pick statistics without context.
2 - Attempt to discredit the opposition and therefore their position: They will parade loon after loon and call them the base of the opposition. They will again, cherry pick their statistics without context.
3 - They will make the choice stark. "Either you are for children's safety or against it."
Our messages will be small in number and limited in distribution. Therefore, we must make them count. We must appeal to intellect and dissuade emotion.
Vocabulary - we can not allow the acceptance of the oppositions language. Words like "epidemic", "crisis" and phrases like "common sense" must be challenged with clarity of reason and sensitivity to those who have suffered. Our language must be clear, without ambiguity and fully aligned to our message/postion.
Statistics/Studies/Events - we must present our positions with evidence that can not be easily refuted. When cherry picked statistics are presented against us, we need to clearly paint them in the larger statistical context. For example: When country "A" banned guns, gun violence went down 70%. Response: That is interesting, however you neglected to mention that violent crime as whole went up 50%, so clearly the void of guns was filled with other weapons and the criminals having less to fear were actually enabled by the disarming of the law abiding citizen population."
Position - we must have a clearly defined, consistent and well reasoned position. For example, If we say that we need to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally unfit, then we must allow for background checks on all legal firearm transfers. We can not allow flawed logic to undermine our position. Our position must be intellectually defensible.
I believe that we will need to very quickly organize and solidify a plan of position/evidence/presentation that uses integrity, civility and discipline as the governing rules of engagement. Anything else will be leveraged against us.
Regards to All
This is the only way we are going to stand a chance at retaining our rights as our Country continues its shift. We are completely out "gunned" in terms of media messaging. Our opposition is a lot more clever, well organized and well funded than most dare admit (see last election if in doubt).
I watched Piers Morgan last night and couldn't sleep very well after (good thread describing here). I believe this type of presentation will be their playbook going forward.
1 - Attempt to demonstrate the existence of a crisis: They will parade around the poor people who suffered through unspeakable horrors. They will string multiple horrific events together into very large segments to make the sum greater than its parts. They will cherry pick statistics without context.
2 - Attempt to discredit the opposition and therefore their position: They will parade loon after loon and call them the base of the opposition. They will again, cherry pick their statistics without context.
3 - They will make the choice stark. "Either you are for children's safety or against it."
Our messages will be small in number and limited in distribution. Therefore, we must make them count. We must appeal to intellect and dissuade emotion.
Vocabulary - we can not allow the acceptance of the oppositions language. Words like "epidemic", "crisis" and phrases like "common sense" must be challenged with clarity of reason and sensitivity to those who have suffered. Our language must be clear, without ambiguity and fully aligned to our message/postion.
Statistics/Studies/Events - we must present our positions with evidence that can not be easily refuted. When cherry picked statistics are presented against us, we need to clearly paint them in the larger statistical context. For example: When country "A" banned guns, gun violence went down 70%. Response: That is interesting, however you neglected to mention that violent crime as whole went up 50%, so clearly the void of guns was filled with other weapons and the criminals having less to fear were actually enabled by the disarming of the law abiding citizen population."
Position - we must have a clearly defined, consistent and well reasoned position. For example, If we say that we need to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally unfit, then we must allow for background checks on all legal firearm transfers. We can not allow flawed logic to undermine our position. Our position must be intellectually defensible.
I believe that we will need to very quickly organize and solidify a plan of position/evidence/presentation that uses integrity, civility and discipline as the governing rules of engagement. Anything else will be leveraged against us.
Regards to All