Subliminals in popular magazines?

Torakx

A friend pointed me to this today and i figured id post it here for your entertainment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHpBFENDBss

The conspiracy theory is pretty much the video itself speaking about subliminals in the media through magazines.
I guess the is the print version of whatim always waffling about with movies on some levels.
I havent got any magazines around but id love to see the edition he used in that video to check.

Gordon

I've no idea what text he's photoshopped on there, would be nice to see the original magazine. But he says that the 'new attitude' paragraph is completely left justified except for the word 'new' @3:28. That's incorrect, why is he lying?

Torakx

What he means by the word NEW is that it normally would be on the left hand side as in the west we read left to right.
So he is asking why is that word pushed all the way right?
Im sure its probably hearsay.I mean maybe alot of words are pushed that way in mags for no reason just that the graphics editor or whoever liked it that way or it left room for the picture.
Anything is possible to me hehe

Gordon

No, he doesn't mean that. He says the paragraph is left justified apart from the word 'new'. This is incorrect, the paragraph is right justified completely. You can tell this by running a vertical line to the right of that paragraph and the end letter on each line lines up with below/above letters. That means the paragraph is right justified, not left justified. Therefore the word 'new' obviously goes to the right.

It's a shame he stated incorrect information there, it gives the rest of what he says no value imo.

I must admit, though, that it's interesting you took his information that way, considering the topic of subliminals leading the brain to believe something else. Sometimes a lie works better than subliminal information, I'm sure there's a handy quote out there somewhere about bigger lies = bigger possibilities..

Joshua Jones

Can you post the link please, cant view embedded for some reason.

Torakx

Gordon wrote: »

No, he doesn't mean that. He says the paragraph is left justified apart from the word 'new'. This is incorrect, the paragraph is right justified completely. You can tell this by running a vertical line to the right of that paragraph and the end letter on each line lines up with below/above letters. That means the paragraph is right justified, not left justified. Therefore the word 'new' obviously goes to the right.

It's a shame he stated incorrect information there, it gives the rest of what he says no value imo.

I must admit, though, that it's interesting you took his information that way, considering the topic of subliminals leading the brain to believe something else. Sometimes a lie works better than subliminal information, I'm sure there's a handy quote out there somewhere about bigger lies = bigger possibilities..

Thanks for that info i didnt know of that expression relating to text and placing it.
So basically when he said left justified he ment what i said but i said it in laymans terms.I can repost whathe is saying in a way you would understand better almost like translating my layman speak into soemthing more suitable to the topic hich would have been appropriate had i that knowledge.
What i obviously ment was that the word "new" was ment to be on the left side which is ussually for me what id consider the normal format for placing words.Aka left justified as i have now learned.
Thanks for clearing that up though.
Also someone has sent me a pm and posted me an image of that mag
They said that photoshop was used to zoom in and they did not see any of the subliminals mentioned.
Which is not a suprise to me even if some people may jump the gun and judge me hehe Not talkign abbout anyone in particular it just happens alot here.Presumptions and all.
But as i said i thought it would be entertaining and an interesting CT.
But wait its not over yet!
What if this guy is paid by the government to put misinfo out about this type of activity so that it can be claimed false and ignored in the future mwuahah

Apologies joshua i wil try to remember next time i embedd somethign to leave the link also.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHpBFENDBss&feature=player_embedded

ps forgive my typing! but im not going to go fix that whole paragraph sorry lol

Gordon

Torakx wrote: »

Thanks for that info i didnt know of that expression relating to text and placing it.
So basically when he said left justified he ment what i said but i said it in laymans terms.

No he didn't

What he meant, as he has studied this well and he seems to understand the intricacies of text layout, is that all of that block of text (on the RHS) was aligned to the left, except for one word.

"It's left justified except for the word 'new'. Why would they pull the word 'new' all the way over?"

But in truth - all of the words on that paragraph were pulled over to the right, because the whole paragraph was right justified, all of it, not just the word 'new'. To show you what I mean visually I attached this picture, the top image is how it appears in the video, the bottom (RHS paragraph) image is actually left justified except for the word 'new' as he seems to think it is. If he truly believed that the paragraph was left justified then he should be making a comparison with the word "notes!" at the bottom of the paragraph and making a correlation with that as that is also on the right hand side, but he doesn't, he skips that bit..

Joshua Jones

I see what he's saying. Been happening for years.

Torakx

Gordon wrote: »

No he didn't

What he meant, as he has studied this well and he seems to understand the intricacies of text layout, is that all of that block of text (on the RHS) was aligned to the left, except for one word.

"It's left justified except for the word 'new'. Why would they pull the word 'new' all the way over?"

But in truth - all of the words on that paragraph were pulled over to the right, because the whole paragraph was right justified, all of it, not just the word 'new'. To show you what I mean visually I attached this picture, the top image is how it appears in the video, the bottom (RHS paragraph) image is actually left justified except for the word 'new' as he seems to think it is. If he truly believed that the paragraph was left justified then he should be making a comparison with the word "notes!" at the bottom of the paragraph and making a correlation with that as that is also on the right hand side, but he doesn't, he skips that bit..

Sorry man i dont even need to read this i understand exactly what your saying.i know what he was saying and at first i presumed it was because normally it would be on the left and yes all words aligned to the left.but they are to the right as i can see.I just didnt know this before until you mentioned justified left etc.
What i ment was its pretty much the same.we can split hairs over it but i agree with you.I dont think he is right.Im not defending his view at all.
but what i see or hear when he says that and whati was saying even though im not convinced is why is that sentence right justified as appose to left?

DeBunny

You've gotta understand . . .look. . It doesn't matter how fraudulent a persons belief systems are, they're very rigid regardless. If you try to attack a persons belief system, even if it has been built off disinformation, you've got to understand, their very personality is built off of the disinformation, so if you attack the disinformation right out of the blue, they're gonna fell like their very existence and their personality is under attack. Does that make sense to you?

And isn't it ironic?
A little toooo ironic.


I have a lot of doubt. Consciously or sub-consciously, this guy is obviously finding what he wants to find. He has proven nothing.
Using his methods you could look at the clouds and find a conspi. . . What's that you say? there is a cloud conspiracy? oh.

The conscience and the sub-conscience mind are a powerful and little understood combination. From reading fortunes in tea cups to hearing voices in the wind to seeing the word sex hidden in a magazine cover, all to often our intelligent minds trick us into seeing coherent patterns where none exist.

My name is URL

Gordon wrote: »

I've no idea what text he's photoshopped on there, would be nice to see the original magazine. But he says that the 'new attitude' paragraph is completely left justified except for the word 'new' @3:28. That's incorrect, why is he lying?

People tend to scan text in an F sort of pattern, even if it's not justified text, lots of little Fs appear in the eye tracker movements of those reading.. not sure whether he is mistaken in how he presents what he sees as fact or if his own perception is what's messed up. I know that if looking at the magazine cover, that I would not notice any subtext in it

Torakx

My name is URL wrote: »

People tend to scan text in an F sort of pattern, even if it's not justified text, lots of little Fs appear in the eye tracker movements of those reading.. not sure whether he is mistaken in how he presents what he sees as fact or if his own perception is what's messed up. I know that if looking at the magazine cover, that I would not notice any subtext in it

well "they" say we are conscious of only 20% of what in front of our eyes.So that word ebing a cross word for nude would be considered part of that 80% i guess is what he is ssaying.Your not supposed to notice it....unless you are aware it might be there then you may spot it.Which brings us to the catch 22 lol
Is it there or is it being imagined and only coincedence.Most likely he is finding things that is not there,unless it is very common and pronounced in a subtle way if you knowwhat i mean.
With movies i migth spot something i nthe background that could be considered linkd to spirituality or some type of god demon when it is pure coincedence.
but when watching a movie and in the same one i see many signs leading to the same thing i ussually consider it to be meaningful to who ever put it in the movie.
Tonight i watched a film called sheltered.Think it was Susan Surandon or however you spell her name.
I was told it was going to be about a woman that didnt believe in multiple personality and put people on the death chair for murders on this basis,but a while into the movie i noticed the usual stuff im always spotting and said to my mate.This is about the devil isnt it?
He said dont think so its about psychology etc.
low and behold it turns into a total demononic fest.
Some of the things i spotted throughout the movie was her fingering a tiny golden cross necklace,a small statue that reminded me of horus sitting on a mantle piece in front of a candle.There was a couple of references i saw anyway.
Its the same with the movie the lovely bones.
was supposed to be about a kidnapping and murder of a child.but during the kidnapping there is an obvious shot directly i think or it seemed to me of a black owl statue.I think the movie was on another level symbolic of ritual sacrifice to molek.but maybe i am just seing things.Its hard to say but generally if i see more evidence i will be slightly more convinced the message in genuinely there.
It may be directors fdoing it for kicks or to add another layer for those with a miind for it.but either way sometimes its there and sometimes its just peoples imagination.
i dont think its always the one thats very closed minded imo.
This magazine thing i put up for entertainments purposes because i wasnt too serious at all about it.just a passing thought really.It doesnt mean it isnt happening imo though.It just means i dont know.

Gordon

Torakx wrote: »

why is that sentence right justified as appose to left?

Because it looks better, maybe it's been proven to be easier on the eye to be more eye catching, or more fluid visually, it's how magazines layout text next to images on the front page, usually.

My name is URL wrote: »

not sure whether he is mistaken in how he presents what he sees as fact or if his own perception is what's messed up.

Yeah, he could simply not actually be looking at the page, because he doesn't notice the word "notes" is also to the right, with no sexual innuendo surrounding its placement. Or he could be deliberately telling wrong information. Either option is worrying.

IrelandSpirit

Gordon wrote: »

Sometimes a lie works better than subliminal information, I'm sure there's a handy quote out there somewhere about bigger lies = bigger possibilities..

"The bigger the lie, the more it will be believed."


Joseph Goebbels

The Scawgeen

I find this thread facinating, about 10 years ago I was in Supermac's waiting for my order when I sat down to wait, there were four young lads aged somewhere between 16 and 20 sitting at the cubicle opposite me, to make a long story short they had a couple of magazines, and a few CD albums, a few Playstation games and a magnifying glass, they were looking at the magazines and the CD, and games sleeves and just saying what they could see, to make a long story even shorter they asked me to look at a photograph in a magazine throught the magnifying glass and tell them what I could see, being a person of delicate disposition I nearly freaked out, I mean I felt scared. There were no words as such that I could see, but there were letters, numbers and shapes (squares, circles, triangles even heart shapes) sometimes there were letters inside shapes, but I couldn't see them without the magnifying glass. It was on blackprint ( as far as I can remember it was a singer photographed in a black leather coat) and it looked like it was written with a pin, the writing was so fine/thin. I came accross a similar thread a few years ago where this same topic was discussed and one of posters suggested the' phenomena' (if that's the right word) could be attributed to the natural layout of the fibres in the paper.

IrelandSpirit

The Scawgeen wrote: »

I find this thread facinating, about 10 years ago I was in Supermac's waiting for my order when I sat down to wait, there were four young lads aged somewhere between 16 and 20 sitting at the cubicle opposite me, to make a long story short they had a couple of magazines, and a few CD albums, a few Playstation games and a magnifying glass, they were looking at the magazines and the CD, and games sleeves and just saying what they could see, to make a long story even shorter they asked me to look at a photograph in a magazine throught the magnifying glass and tell them what I could see, being a person of delicate disposition I nearly freaked out, I mean I felt scared. There were no words as such that I could see, but there were letters, numbers and shapes (squares, circles, triangles even heart shapes) sometimes there were letters inside shapes, but I couldn't see them without the magnifying glass. It was on blackprint ( as far as I can remember it was a singer photographed in a black leather coat) and it looked like it was written with a pin, the writing was so fine/thin. I came accross a similar thread a few years ago where this same topic was discussed and one of posters suggested the' phenomena' (if that's the right word) could be attributed to the natural layout of the fibres in the paper.

It might be the fibres in the paper, simply because you'd think if you need a magnifying glass it defeats the purpose. Though as regards subliminals in general, it is well-known the eye can pick up extraordinarily fine details.

And it must be remembered that it is not the eye that sees, the eye is a lens/tool for the the mind which actually decodes light into an image. How that image is decoded and 'seen' is largely dependant on social conditioning. In some cases entirely so, but either way, it is also well-known we all register far more than what we are consciously aware of.

Under hypnosis for instance, people can recall things they are not aware of consciously. And it is this subconscious element of our psyche which subliminal advertising target. It is the arrangement of certain imagery or words, and how they relate to each other and convey meaning (to the subconscious) which is the most favoured. It can be (and often is) as simple as combining imagery of a sexual nature with the product you're selling, and/or key words and colours. I.e. 'buy me and you'll get laid'. Sounds primitive, but it works!

However, what is perhaps the most worrying is subliminal imagery inserted within film. If i remember rightly, it's around 13 frames per second where the concious mind no longer picks up on them; the images 'flash' so fast the mind can't actulay see (decode) them, and yet the subconscious does. The subconscious mind sees and records everything. This does work and was supposedly stamped out back in the 50s (I think), when drinks' companies used this type of subliminal technique on cinema audiences, but I reckon it would be incredibly difficult to actually enforce these regulations - taking into account the number of hours of TV broadcasting and DVD films and playstation games, etc, etc.

Di0genes

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

It might be the fibres in the paper, simply because you'd think if you need a magnifying glass it defeats the purpose. Though as regards subliminals in general, it is well-known the eye can pick up extraordinarily fine details.

And it must be remembered that it is not the eye that sees, the eye is a lens/tool for the the mind which actually decodes light into an image. How that image is decoded and 'seen' is largely dependant on social conditioning. In some cases entirely so, but either way, it is also well-known we all register far more than what we are consciously aware of.

Under hypnosis for instance, people can recall things they are not aware of consciously. And it is this subconscious element of our psyche which subliminal advertising target. It is the arrangement of certain imagery or words, and how they relate to each other and convey meaning (to the subconscious) which is the most favoured. It can be (and often is) as simple as combining imagery of a sexual nature with the product you're selling, and/or key words and colours. I.e. 'buy me and you'll get laid'. Sounds primitive, but it works!

However, what is perhaps the most worrying is subliminal imagery inserted within film. If i remember rightly, it's around 13 frames per second where the concious mind no longer picks up on them; the images 'flash' so fast the mind can't actulay see (decode) them

No. Everything above is wrong. PAL video runs at 25fps, and NTSC runs at 29fps. Any domestic or professional video editing software can walk through this at a frame by frame rate.

So basically you've no idea what you are talking about an your opinion and "facts" should be treating accordingly.

Bog Warrior

Once this subliminal is revealed it is so obvious..

any spotters?

IrelandSpirit

Di0genes wrote: »

No. Everything above is wrong. PAL video runs at 25fps, and NTSC runs at 29fps. Any domestic or professional video editing software can walk through this at a frame by frame rate.

So basically you've no idea what you are talking about an your opinion and "facts" should be treating accordingly.

Right so, everything I say is wrong and I have no idea - yet another great contribution from Diogenes! I don't know why you post on these forums, I really don't. Subliminal messaging in modern advertising (post WWII) does exist. If you don't think so, then you're entitled to your opinion, as I and others here are entitled to ours.

In the meantime, google!!!

Di0genes

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Right so, everything I say is wrong and I have no idea -

Yes it is. And thank you for admitting it. flash frames at 13fps aren't capable of bypassing the conscious mind.

yet another great contribution from Diogenes!

Why thank you.

:cool::P:confused:pac::pac::rolleyes::rolleyes::p:D:D:D

I don't know why you post on these forums, I really don't.

I enjoy pointing out the incredibly basic factual errors in the claims of posters like yourself.

Subliminal messaging in modern advertising (post WWII) does exist. If you don't think so, then you're entitled to your opinion, as I and others here are entitled to ours.

I've pointed out that your claim about 13fps video is completely incorrect. Stating that subliminal advertising in tv exists in the face of your basic factual error suggests that you are insecure and don't like being corrected when you're wrong.

In the meantime, google!!!

Waving me in the direction of google isn't a compelling counter argument.

IrelandSpirit

I said I think 13fps if i remebered correctly, it's been ages since i looked into all this, but you claim EVERYTHING I say in my post is wrong. Well, is it? No. So bassically, yeah, you really do need some more googling!:D:D

IrelandSpirit

Bog Warrior wrote: »

Once this subliminal is revealed it is so obvious..

any spotters?

That's a really good example! LOL!

Hold on ... it is real though, is it? apologies in advance if it is, just can't be too sure with some people these days

Di0genes

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Oooooh, stooping to nit-picking typos 'cos you've neither merit nor wit, eh?

Listen, I'm not getting into this, I know what you're doing. You know what happens next. Bassically

No see I pointed out a fundamental factual flaw in your argument. I stooped to derision when you waved me in the direction of google, as a response.

My argument was pertinent and valid, and was IMO, mildly witty, your retort suggesting I waste my time investigating something you claim as true yet get fundamental factual errors wrong despite the fact that a cursory check on the google will expose your mistake.

In short practice what you preach.

IrelandSpirit

Di0genes wrote: »

No see I pointed out a fundamental factual flaw in your argument. I stooped to derision when you waved me in the direction of google, as a response.

I really do think you do need to do more research into subliminal advertising as you believe it does not exist, googling other sites and forums is a good start

My argument was pertinent and valid, and was IMO, mildly witty, your retort suggesting I waste my time investigating something you claim as true yet get fundamental factual errors wrong despite the fact that a cursory check on the google will expose your mistake.

How does pointing out a typo strengthen the argument that I am entirely wrong and have no idea? Yes, 'pertinent and mildly witty', in your world I'm sure. BTW, isn't there something about that in the forum charter?

In short practice what you preach.

In short, continue. Show yourself up for what you are some more, continue.

My name is URL

Di0genes wrote: »

Thats about as subliminal as the innuendo in a Roger Moore era Bond Movie.

Are you suggesting that it's blindingly obvious that subliminal message(s) are possibly being portrayed in that ad? Because I'm fairly sure that if you asked a group of people to spot them (without using Google), a fairly large % would not be able to

Yitzhak Rabin

My name is URL wrote: »

Are you suggesting that it's blindingly obvious that subliminal message(s) are possibly being portrayed in that ad? Because I'm fairly sure that if you asked a group of people to spot them (without using Google), a fairly large % would not be able to

Just googled that there. I hadn't spotted it, and definitely wouldn't have if it wasn't pointed out.

humanji

Right, I've deleted a load of tripe from this thread. Keep on topic and stop the petty bickering.

Bog Warrior

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

That's a really good example! LOL!

Hold on ... it is real though, is it? apologies in advance if it is, just can't be too sure with some people these days

Yea its a real ad, an old one

It's hard to miss once you have seen it isn't it?

All the 'sex' in the hair and smoke stuff is a bit far fetched for me, but subliminals are being used without doubt.

Loads more here

Bog Warrior

I remember the first time I saw this in the shops thinking wtf?

IrelandSpirit

Bog Warrior wrote: »

Yea its a real ad, an old one

It's hard to miss once you have seen it isn't it?

All the 'sex' in the hair and smoke stuff is a bit far fetched for me, but subliminals are being used without doubt.

Loads more here

Wow, thanks for that link! There's a lot of good info there for sure ...

(And never knew the human eye turned on its side like that looks like that! )

K-9

Bog Warrior wrote: »

I remember the first time I saw this in the shops thinking wtf?

Can work against you too!

Eva Mendes Sex tape:
Watch This: Eva Mendes Sex Tape - Cinematical

Thought it was funny.