Saturday, April 08, 2017

Cernovich vs 60 Minutes: the complete transcript

It's interesting to see how their little tricks and traps are so much less effective in print:
Scott Pelley: How would you describe what you do?

Mike Cernovich: I’m a lawyer, author, documenter, filmmaker, and journalist.
Scott Pelley: And how would you describe your website?

Mike Cernovich: Edgy, controversial content that goes against the dominant narrative.

Scott Pelley: What’s the dominant narrative?

Mike Cernovich: The dominant narrative is that there are good guys and there are bad guys. The good guys are liberals. Everybody on the right is a bad guy. Let’s find a way to make everybody look bad. Let’s tie marginal figures who have no actual influence to anybody we cannot overwrite. That’s the narrative.

Scott Pelley: That’s not a narrative I’m familiar with. Who’s narrative is that?

Mike Cernovich: Well, I guess, the question I always ask people is, why’s David Duke relevant? He’s not. But the media drags him out every time there’s a Republican runs for office because David Duke knows if he endorses a candidate, then people will say oh my god, you better disavow this guy. You better disavow. Why? Nobody has anything to do with that guy. He’s trash, right?

Whereas on the left, when you have people like Reverend Jeremiah White, a right rath-Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and other kind of fringe people. I don’t see them being dragged out and saying Bernie, you better disavow, Hillary, you better disavow this guy.

Scott Pelley: But my, my question is who’s narrative is that?

Mike Cernovich: Well, it’s largely cultural. There narrative would definitely be conventional mainstream media. Which is made up of certain people. 90% of journalist who donate to campaigns, gave to Hillary Clinton. There’s a left-leaning bias for sure. Which is not necessarily nefarious, but is the result of our own human limitations to view the world rationally. To filter things, our own confirmation bias, and through cultural norms.

Scott Pelley: And, uh, you describe the mainstream media as what? Who is that?

Mike Cernovich: The industry. 90% of media companies are owned by six corporations. Concentration media ownership. So the New York times would be. The New York Times, the Washington Post, they’re all writing the same kind of stories.
Playing dumb is a lot less effective in print than it is on television, perhaps because it requires playing down to the level of the average TV viewership, which is probably around 90.

Now you know why I insist on written questions, and why doing so tends to make the reporters seeking interviews with me disappear.



Blogger DeploraBard April 08, 2017 10:56 AM  

Who’s narrative is that?
Yours you fucking douche.

Blogger DeploraBard April 08, 2017 11:03 AM  

That was a quote from the interview. To clarify, the douche is Scott Pelley.

Anonymous Anonymous April 08, 2017 11:03 AM  

As long as they spell the name right.

Anonymous Anonymous April 08, 2017 11:04 AM  

Holy shit, Cerno absolutely wrecked these guys and they still managed to edit it down to a draw on TV.

Anonymous Grayman April 08, 2017 11:07 AM  

Kushner has got to go, he's a soros cuck

Anonymous (ANNOYED GRUNT) April 08, 2017 11:14 AM  

@4: OK, apology offered. Accepted?

Blogger DeploraBard April 08, 2017 11:16 AM  

Of course.

Blogger Koanic April 08, 2017 11:20 AM  

Playing dumb is how the higher cognitive functions of the outermind convince themselves that the inner rabbit isn't a lying sack of shit.

Blogger wreckage April 08, 2017 11:23 AM  

They use physical and tone cues. In print, with only the actual words, their argument is stripped- because it's not an argument. They ape the physical and tonal cues of social dominance and rejection of an outsider, then edit out the parts where the outsider's physical and tonal cues are either not submission, or are incongruous enough to break the illusion.

In the end you are left with their perfect fantasy of dominance/rejection, which gets distilled, rerun, and then the feedback loop begins, where they go to "reaction".... which is of course all people showing the cues congruous with their play-out of dominance and rejection.

They leaven this with some dominance-inclusion/protection (feedback of someone looking threatened, then back to the newsman looking stern and protective).

Et voila: all the monkey postures have been made and affirmed (by editing out everyone who didn't submit-posture). The approved personages are reaffirmed as troupe leaders.

(Incidentally, Now onto some music videos where high-ranked females of the troupe engage in displays of sexual dominance.

By the time it's done everyone feels very safely ensconced in the mid-to-low troupe ranking, rejecting the pariahs and rogues, yet vaguely threatened - the more to feel the necessity of the troupe.)

Blogger The Kurgan April 08, 2017 11:27 AM  

@4 and @8
Now Kith!

Blogger Matthew April 08, 2017 11:54 AM  

Scoobius, if that's you, you're still banned.

Anonymous Anonymous April 08, 2017 11:55 AM  


That is *exactly* what Sixty Minutes did to Gary Gygax back at the height of the Satanic Panic.

I could never put into words just what was off about that segment, but you totally nailed it!

Anonymous Rocklea April 08, 2017 12:02 PM  

Good to see the full transcript. Interesting how far apart the editing was in the finished product. Add to that what Wreckage says about visual cues, you have to conclude that Mike did amazing work. Says he prepared for week and it showed.

Don't talk to the media.

Blogger Timmy3 April 08, 2017 12:04 PM  

That's the standard line of questioning of Katie Couric who manages to destroy Sarah Palin. Getting someone who can articulate to awful questions is hard. The questions are made to hang you to dry.

Anonymous Man of the Atom April 08, 2017 12:04 PM  

The transcript demonstrated how dim Pelley is. Hollyweird cum Newser never played so good!

Blogger dc.sunsets April 08, 2017 12:06 PM  

I used to think that when this long mania ends, institutional inversion will occur. I now see that most of the institutions to which we're accustomed won't invert, they'll evaporate.

When people are no longer looking for rationalizations of the pathological trust, togetherness and openness they are impelled to exhibit, they won't need media dinosaurs to rationalize their rage.

Rage will flow, driving actions currently deemed unconscionable, and people won't feel much need to rationalize squat.

60 Minutes will disappear and if ever remembered, the context will either be as a rage focus or wondering why anyone ever gave a rat's ass about the clowns who produced it.

Blogger Pteronarcyd April 08, 2017 12:17 PM  


Give Cernovich an A for tactfulness. I would have used your suggested reply.

Andrew Klavan autopsied the Cernovich interview on one of his podcasts this week, I think. He barbecued Pelley.

Blogger Mountain Man April 08, 2017 12:24 PM  


Here is additional information:

Goldman Sachs, Google, Facebook in on it along with former Twitter executives.
Make America Great Again - my ass! Not when family members like this are at the helm.
Its just a wash, rinse, repeat of the last 80 years.

Anonymous Longtime Lurker April 08, 2017 12:40 PM  

People who play dumb are just begging to be educated. And that goes double for Pelley.

Blogger VD April 08, 2017 12:41 PM  

You're banned because you're a tedious narcissist and no one wants to read your spergish self-therapeutic psychodrama, Scoobius.

Start your own blog already.

Anonymous a_peraspera April 08, 2017 12:47 PM  

"my question is who’s narrative is that?"

Pelley was hoping Cerno would blurt out "THE JEWS!!!" lol

Anonymous Maximo Macaroni April 08, 2017 1:07 PM  

So now the editorial staff of Sixty Minutes can't spell "whose"??

Anonymous a_peraspera April 08, 2017 1:26 PM  

"So now the editorial staff of Sixty Minutes can't spell 'whose'"??"

Affirmative action creep?

Anonymous Man of the Atom April 08, 2017 1:34 PM  

Maximo Macaroni wrote:So now the editorial staff of Sixty Minutes can't spell "whose"??

Likely that transcript was from Mike's recording of he interview, so he or his transcriber probably messed up "whose/who's" in this case.

Anonymous Anonymous April 08, 2017 2:14 PM  

Playing dumb works only in audio because the condescending tones are required to be effective. The tone takes prominence over the words in most peoples' psychology and the guy who "talks down" generally wins.

From the tiny bit I heard of the interview, I thought Cernovich countered the condescending tones very well. That's harder to do against some experienced interviewers, and I gotta give Cern credit even though I'm not a fan of his.

Allow me to sperg a bit here, but about voices and psychology, guys who can't get women- listen to your voice in a recording sometime. If it sounds like a powerful musical composition, you're gonna get women. If it sounds like the losing horn from The Price Is Right, make some adjustments.

Blogger VD April 08, 2017 2:17 PM  

Go have fun somewhere else, Scoobius.

Anonymous Reenay April 08, 2017 2:18 PM  

Cernovich really handled that with a lot more tacit than justice calls for. But one day, justice will come knocking. "Vengeance is mine," says the Lord.

Blogger VD April 08, 2017 2:19 PM  

Log in and delete them yourself.

Blogger Pteronarcyd April 08, 2017 2:27 PM  

"They use physical and tone cues. In print, with only the actual words, their argument is stripped- because it's not an argument. They ape the physical and tonal cues of social dominance and rejection of an outsider, then edit out the parts where the outsider's physical and tonal cues are either not submission, or are incongruous enough to break the illusion."

Watch the interview as broadcast Pelley appears to come out on top -- precisely due to biased editing, as the transcript proves. Too bad Cernovich could not video the entire interview. Someone needs to do just that, ala Project Veritas, so people can see what happened next to what was broadcast.

The icing on the cake was Cernovich, shortly after the interview aired painting him as a purveyor of fake news, broke the biggest story of 2017 -- Dirty Rice surveiling Team Trump and the media covering the story up.

Anonymous L-L April 08, 2017 2:31 PM  

I can't, the account doesn't exist, I deleted my account years ago.

Nevermind then, it is what it is, sorry for being of topic.

Blogger Cail Corishev April 08, 2017 2:32 PM  

Clearly the guy was playing dumb with "whose narrative is it?" because he was trying to get Mike to say, "Well, yours, for instance." Just as clearly, Mike wouldn't give that obvious answer. It makes me wonder what the trap was, what the next statement-as-question would have been. I'm guessing the drone would have spergtastically insisted that Mike define "mainstream" and why 60 Minutes qualifies, trying to steer him down the rabbit hole of giving a hard definition for something that doesn't have an exact one even though everyone knows it when they see it. I suppose that could make the interviewee look like he was making claims he couldn't back up -- especially with editing. I wouldn't have seen that coming; I would have boldly said, "I'm looking at it," and then they would have edited that out and just kept the part where I couldn't define "mainstream" to their satisfaction.

Don't talk to the media.

By the way, Pelley sure tried to shoot down the Pizzagate stuff, didn't he? Unlike with Hillary's health, it wasn't enough to just say, "You shouldn't have printed this without more sources." On Pizzagate, he came on stronger and just flat-out said it's all false. That doesn't even make logical sense. You can't know a story is false when you haven't even investigated it yet.

Anonymous Brick Hardslab April 08, 2017 3:01 PM  

For someone like me who didn't watch the segment and just read the full transcript sixty minutes comes off as tools. Stupid tools with an agenda. Asking over and over again 'what's the agenda?' makes it obvious they weren't serious. Nobody doubts there's an agenda and nobody doubts what it is.

Blogger RobertT April 08, 2017 3:39 PM  

Respect to Cernovich. We need more people willing to speak truth to power. If you go away every time they belittle you, it encourages to keep belittling. But if you keep coming back and getting in their faces, it will destroy the left's main weapon against public figures. Right now, as far as I can tell, Roger Stone and Cernovich are the only people standing their ground. Sessions, Flynn, not so much.

Blogger Nate73 April 08, 2017 4:54 PM  

@9: I abandoned visual media a long time ago for the reasons you allude to. It's too easy to craft tone and emotion and lighting and angle and everything else to create a false narrative. Everybody knows how Nixon lost his debate with Kennedy if you asked the tv audience but the reverse if you asked the radio audience. There's tons of other tricks too. Like they can show you B-roll of a missile attack from 5 years ago without outright stating something was a missile attack for example, so the message is clear but you can't catch them in a verbal lie.

This is also why I like Vox Day and Stefan Molyneux and MC on youtube. They keep the visuals to a minimum, only their faces and maybe a graph or picture now and then. No editing or jumpcuts. If VD ever started making flashy graphics-filled videos like CNN I'd stop watching him too.

Blogger Nate73 April 08, 2017 5:09 PM  

Sorry for the double post, but I was glad to find this golden quote from B5 is still available:

Anonymous Anonymous April 08, 2017 5:44 PM  

Pelley was hoping Cerno would blurt out "THE JEWS!!!" lol

Yeah, that made me laugh too.

Nice try, fellow white people.

Anonymous Silly but True April 08, 2017 7:47 PM  

Funny that April 2017 issue of Scientific America has an article "Inside the Echo Chamber" covering a study how computational scientists are analyzing how conspuricy theories spread online, and what can be done to stop them.

For the record, they used the term "mainstream media" without defining it. Because some things people just know.

Blogger Cail Corishev April 08, 2017 7:57 PM  

computational scientists are analyzing how conspuricy theories spread online, and what can be done to stop them.

That's interesting. I'm reading a book on network science, and the mathematicians who study it have pretty much concluded that you can't stop ideas from spreading online, at least not without taking down so many important hubs that you'd effectively be taking down the Internet itself.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents April 08, 2017 8:06 PM  

@37 @38

Wonder how well the Great Firewall of China is really working out for them? Aside from the massive employment opportunities for online block captains, is it actually keeping stuff out?

Anonymous Silly but True April 08, 2017 8:41 PM  

I think intuitively that's right. But that's not going to stop them from trying.

US will turn into China for most popular services.

Anonymous Brick Hardslab April 08, 2017 10:06 PM  

I love how the guy pretended not to know what the narrative was. Honest reporting right there. Sixty minutes came off as petty, petulant and slow while Cernovich looked much sharper and more honest. I love how he dealt with the comet pizza deal. Then linked Clinton conclusively to child traffickers. I would have liked to have seen their expressions.

Blogger Gordon April 08, 2017 10:28 PM  

The thing to remember is that Pelley probably isn't all that smart, and is not particularly connected to anything outside his media world. He doesn't socialize with anyone who voted for Trump, and he doesn't read NewsBusters, Ace of Spades HQ, Hot Air, or any other conservative news analysis.

News people are not very smart. They are good at looking good, and looking sincere. But like Ron Burgandy, they'll read anything you put in front of them. And everything put in front of them is written by young, mostly female producers. Pelley does no research. The producers do it, and write the questions. Pelley just shows up and reads them and leaves.

Blogger Koanic April 08, 2017 11:33 PM  

Cerno smeared this pussy like a dumptruck tire.

Too soon?

Anonymous Mack April 09, 2017 2:01 AM  

I didn't catch it the first time watching the interview. In print it really bears it out. The reporter is trying to get Cernovich to name the Jew. It's actually Cernovich who is playing at not knowing (((who))). Kek.

Anonymous Rocklea April 09, 2017 4:42 AM  

Cernovich just broke this:

Fake news.
Fake gas attack.
Fake missile strike.
And now a brand spanking new Fake war.
Perhaps it will take a Fake nuke?.
De-construct the narrative and bring the war home.

Politicians and MSM are a vulnerable minority group and should be resettled with their friends in the middle east.
They need to go back.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts