I've got to go with Dave here. Did you read the Times article? (side note: I never read the Times on line because of their clue-less log in policy, but I really wanted to see this one, so I went through the hassle of making an account. First I tried to make the helpful cypherpunk/cypherpunk account, only to be told that the name was already taken, then I opted for the less subtle fuckyou/capitalistpig account, only to be greeted with this somewhat humerous statement from the Times: "The Subscriber ID fuckyou is not available. We suggest fuckyou707 instead." Is the 707 random, or have 706 people before me choosen that name? In any case I'm probably the only 65-69 year old woman from Afganistan making more than $150K a year.) Anyway, knowing a little bit about video editing, I totally agree with the statement in the article: "Almost every advertising professional interviewed said that given the
technology by which commercials are assembled frame by frame, it
was virtually impossible for a producer not to know the word was
there." These things are assembled frame by frame. The editor knows what is in every frame. For sure. The larger question as to whether this is an effective form of mind control is still open. As is the possiblity that the Times is not telling the truth, and the frame shown does not really exist (harder for me to believe.) But in any case, the one thing we can be sure of: nobody really cares too much. Rats? Sure, they're both rats.
|
- jim 9-12-2000 4:37 pm