"CLASSIC: What is the Military-entertainment Complex? "

In tonight's Classic episode, Ben and Matt return to a continual fascination: Eisenhower warned the public about the rise of the military-industrial complex back in his 1961 farewell address, and over the decades the public has become increasingly aware of the potential for corruption in the close relationship between the military and the private defense industry. But have you heard of the military-entertainment complex? It's the reason you see the US military in so many action films, and the reason Uncle Sam bankrolls video games. In this episode, the guys dive into the surprisingly close links between Hollywood and the Pentagon, exploring just how this relationship evolved -- and why it continues in the modern day.

They don't want you to read our book.: https://static.macmillan.com/static/fib/stuff-you-should-read/

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Fellow conspiracy realist. We are returning to you with a
classic today. This is something that we had a lot
of fun with. We've all heard of the military industrial complex,
but what about the military entertainment complex.

Speaker 2 (00:20):
That was the sound of a Navy jet flying by
and it was on your TV screen.

Speaker 1 (00:26):
Yeah, tanks rolling in the distance. The American Army is
coming in Acts three to rescue our heroes.

Speaker 2 (00:35):
What is that an official M sixteen rifle? It looks
like it came right off of the line.

Speaker 1 (00:40):
Hey, you know what's amazing about this video game? I
love it. Turns out that Uncle Sam actually paid for
a lot of it.

Speaker 2 (00:47):
I think that's a real XM foreign call of duty.

Speaker 1 (00:51):
We are talking about the US military entertainment complex. This
is related kind to Eisenhower's old warning from his nineteen
sixty one farewell address there is a conspiracy afoot. There
are very close links between Hollywood and the Pentagon and Matt,

(01:12):
I think we had a ton of fun with this one.

Speaker 2 (01:15):
I recall that it was fun. I also recall how
disturbing it was just realizing that we are being conditioned
in this very specific way that Ben I know personally,
I have had exposure to a lot in my lifetime.

Speaker 1 (01:33):
Hmm, same same, Who doesn't love Gi Joe?

Speaker 2 (01:37):
Oh?

Speaker 1 (01:38):
Let's roll the day from UFOs to psychic powers and
government conspiracies. History is riddled with unexplained events. You can
turn back now or learn this stuff they don't want
you to know. A production of iHeartRadio.

Speaker 2 (02:07):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Noah.

Speaker 1 (02:10):
They call me Ben. We're joined as always with our
superproducer Alexis code name Doc Holliday Jackson. Most importantly, you
are you are here, and that makes this stuff they
don't want you to know. Let's start in January of
nineteen sixty one, although this isn't really where our story begins.

(02:31):
On January seventeenth, nineteen sixty one, an outgoing US president
named Dwight D. Eisenhower spoke to the American nation in
his farewell address. Now, as history buffs know, Eisenhower was
a military guy. He wasn't a diplomat. He wasn't kind of,
you know, like a a lawyer or something. He wasn't
given to prevarication. He didn't guild the lily very well.

(02:54):
He was pretty blunt in his speech that day, and
he issued the following warning.

Speaker 3 (03:01):
And the councils of government, we must guard against the
acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the
military industrial complex.

Speaker 1 (03:12):
So we've heard that phrase. That phrase has come up
in our show pretty often before, right, guys, the military
industrial complex.

Speaker 4 (03:20):
Oh yeah, it's a bit of a buzzphrase at this
point in history.

Speaker 2 (03:23):
I would say, yeah, and it means a great number
of things. And to have Dwight D. Eisenhower, a man
who knew his stuff, speaking about it in that way
was certainly a warning.

Speaker 1 (03:36):
Yeah, a warning that would go on to become infamous
and tremendously impactful, especially as more and more of the
public became aware of the truth behind the thirty fourth
president's words. Because for a long time, you know, the
heads of business and the heads of politics, and the

(03:56):
heads of the military knew about this agglomeration of influence,
but you know, like the average person in Nebraska maybe
wasn't so aware of what went on in the halls
of Washington. Especially fun fact that speech is edited, and
I don't know if everybody knows that Eisenhower had kind
of a shaky relationship with Congress and his original speech

(04:17):
had the phrase as military industrial congressional complex doesn't have
the same ring to it.

Speaker 2 (04:24):
We can just add a tiny bit to that, right,
just to discuss how the constituents of a senator or
a congressman may have an interest in that whole military
industrial complex side.

Speaker 1 (04:37):
Oh sure, yeah, yeah, because you're supposed to serve your constituents.
The problem is defining constituent gets kind of sticky, right.

Speaker 4 (04:46):
Do you think it was removed as to not throw
Congress under the bus, because I mean, is it said
as a negative? It's a negative, right.

Speaker 1 (04:54):
Yeah, yeah, it's a negative. Well, it has the potential
to be a huge negative, and it's it's removed for
any number of speculated reasons. It could have been removed
to be an olive branch to Congress or to avoid
poking their particular legislative beehive. But either way, we're not

(05:19):
here to talk about the military industrial complex today. We
have plenty of episodes that mention aspects of it, Please
check them out. Instead, we're talking about another similar phenomenon
that you have definitely seen. Even if you don't live
in the US, you have definitely been witnessed to this
and you may not have known exactly what was going on,

(05:39):
because it's the stuff they don't want you to know.
Today's episode, Folks, is about something called the Military Entertainment Complex.
Here are the facts. To answer that question, we first
have to say, well, what the hell is this like?
A Is it like a high rise entertainment center where
you can go and get a day path and get

(06:00):
an Abrams tank? There there is a place where you
can ride a tank for fun here in Georgia.

Speaker 4 (06:05):
Maybe just an elaborate paintball course.

Speaker 2 (06:08):
See to me, it sounds like an arcade, like a
dope arcade.

Speaker 1 (06:14):
Yeah, Like you get all the you can also get
some simulators, right, Like you can get a virtual Apache
flying machine, you can do all the space camp stuff.
I'm still mad that I couldn't get the budget from
from our bosses to ride in the tank. I should
have done a better job picture there. I was just like,

(06:35):
let's get in a tank.

Speaker 4 (06:37):
And all the arcade machines are manufactured by Lockheed.

Speaker 1 (06:39):
Martin or Pratt Whitney. The ones that blow up are
made by Pratt Whitney.

Speaker 2 (06:45):
Yeah, but that's Joe King aside. That is not what
we're talking about here. Yes, we're we're talking about the relationship.
Just just as with the military industrial complex. It is
the military, as you know, one large thing, and all
the branches of that military working together with the industries
that create the things that are necessary for that military

(07:08):
to function. Right exactly, This is the military again as
a thing with the branches, but working with the entertainment
industry in some.

Speaker 1 (07:16):
Way, yes, in multiple ways. We're talking feature films, we're
talking VR and AR, virtual NOUGMA and reality. We're talking
multimedia video games, music videos, we're talking television. Here in
the US, for a long time, it's been common for
the armed forces to work directly with production companies in

(07:38):
all areas of the media to supply things like troops, gear, equipment, logistics,
even some modeling, for instance, in the case of video games.
This is this is a symbiosis of a sort which
would be common to everybody from your high school biology.
There are five types of semiotic relationships, right we all

(07:59):
remember commensalism, predation, parasitism, and competition. This would be when
it works for everyone involved. This is mutualism. The production
company saves a lot on budget and the military gets
a lot of good will, so of course it makes

(08:21):
sense and This is not a huge secret. A lot
of people don't know about it, but it's not a
huge secret. What do I mean when I say that
the Department of Defense has a statement about it on
its website. They're excited. They think this is a great idea.

Speaker 4 (08:33):
Yeah, that's right. Their official position on this is that
they've been working for nearly a century to quote accurately
depict military stories and make sure sensitive information isn't disclosed.
So it's kind of a quid pro quo situation. Like,
you know, let's say a big production needs, you know,
some kind of military you know, set piece that's very

(08:55):
expensive and also would probably require some sign off from
the military in general. So this is sort of like
a we'll help you out, you help us out. We
kind of help guide the way you depict our brand,
because let's be honest, the military is a brand, especially
in this context. And you get free tanks or whatever
for your tenpole movie.

Speaker 1 (09:16):
Yeah. So there. Let's take an example from LA So
this happens a lot in Hollywood. There's an Army lieutenant
colonel who is the director of the LA Office of
the Chief of Public Affairs. His name is Tim Hyde,
and heide says, we take both of these roles very seriously,
meaning accurate depictions and keeping the secret stuff secret. His

(09:40):
office isn't in charge of the entire armed forces in Hollywood.
His office just focuses on the stuff for the army,
and every other branch of the armed services, including the Coastguard,
has its own office in Hollywood just for this stuff.
I mean, we can talk. I think we all were.

(10:00):
We're kind of thinking about this as we're gearing up
for this episode, but we can talk pretty easily about
feature films and fiction that we've seen here, because I
think feature films are probably probably the stuff that people
most easily recognize this complex from.

Speaker 2 (10:17):
Well, one of the first things I think about is
just how cool big action movies are when some tanks
show up, like some actual tanks, and you're looking at
the screen, you could tell it's an actual tank, especially
movies from my childhood where computer graphics weren't as sophisticated,
where you know, oh, that's an actual Huey helicopter. Oh
that's an actual you know, if you're thinking about top gun,

(10:39):
that's an actual I think it was an F eighteen.
Maybe it was a Tomcat. I don't know, but of
the actor that was then top Gun. But yeah, but
you when you know that it's a real thing, it
just makes it that much cooler. And what I end
up remembering are the times when the military in some
form or fashion comes in and saves the day, such

(11:01):
as in Jurassic Park three. Do you guys remember that
movie at all?

Speaker 1 (11:05):
Nope?

Speaker 4 (11:07):
Is that the one with the pterodactyls. Yes, all the
pterodactyls in the and and they like walk like weirdly,
like they're on crutches or something. I remember that part
and it looked really awkward.

Speaker 2 (11:19):
Yes, But but I have a very vivid memory of
the end of that movie when they're on I want
to say, they like come back to the beach area
where they're just trying to get the heck off the island.
They're hoping they're going to be saved, and then there's
just some dude standing there on the island in a suit.
I think, maybe I'm wrong. I think that's what happens,

(11:40):
and then all of a sudden the military shows up.
I'm assuming the Navy in these uh these these they
look like a PC's but they can they're they function
in water as well. And they just roll up with
a bunch of military personnel and save the day and
get everybody off the island.

Speaker 1 (11:57):
That's a that's a common trope, you know. I remember
I remember watching Independence Day, the original Independence Day, saw
it in the theaters, thought it was kick ass, And
you know, it's one of those things where we don't
worry too much about the plot holes, like how did
that guy from Jurassic Park also end up in Independence Day?

(12:17):
You know what I mean? Why is everybody in those
films acting except for Jeff Goldbloom And what an interesting
life he leads aliens and dinosaurs. But the military plays
a huge role in Independence Stay. And just like your point, Matt,
there are at length depictions of actual military craft. You know,

(12:37):
we see the jets, just like in Top Gun. We
see uniformed individuals carrying out their duties and operations. And
you can still see, of course, you can see this
in blockbuster action films. It's amazing, and it's it's so expensive,
Like if you look at Okay, you can think of
those obvious examples. Top Gun is probably one of the

(12:59):
most famous examples, but there are a ton of the
movies in the eighties, nineties, and the modern day that
do this Apollo thirteen, Red Dawn, Blackhawk down, of course.
But then there's other stuff you might not have thought of,
like the Transformers franchise. All of the films in the
Transformers franchise benefited from the military entertainment complex. Yeah.

Speaker 4 (13:18):
A great place to see it is the types of
disaster movies like Towering Inferno or whatever.

Speaker 2 (13:23):
That andres or something like that, something like that. It
was about the fault. It's about the fault.

Speaker 4 (13:28):
I don't remember. There's so many and it's such a
well worn trope. It's been around forever. But there's always
an opportunity for folks to get rescued from a burning
building by military personnel, and you're right, they always look
like the heroes. I got to ask you before we
get into it. Do you think movies like Apocalypse Now
had military co sign where it kind of makes the
military look bad and sort of shows the flaws that

(13:50):
can arise from leadership and people that go power, Matt,
I would think, maybe.

Speaker 1 (13:55):
Not excellent questions. So there are, of course, you know,
we have to ask about the opposite of this practice.
So there are, of course many films many also in
the United states that put the military in less than
a positive light to apocalypse. Now, I was thinking of
that one because I'm such a huge fan of that

(14:16):
that story, but I was also thinking of Full Metal Jacket,
which itself is a somewhat damning condemnation of the effects
that war can have on people. Those films were still
were still made, obviously to great acclaim, But did they
have that same level of help as we're going to see.

(14:38):
Not exactly. Not exactly, because this practice is cyclical. Funding
for US productions of this sort actually went down in
the seventies because US audiences were so very fatigued about
the ongoing conflicts in Vietnam, and of course the fact
that the war in Vietnam was one of the first

(15:02):
times the American public saw uncensored footage of what happens
on the ground during a hot conflict. So, yes, there
are caveats, and they're really what today's episode hinges on
the implications of those caveats and the employment of those
Some version of this practice, it's so old. Some version

(15:23):
of it dates all the way back to nineteen twenty
seven a little Bit of War for the movie Buffs
in the Crowd. The first year of the Academy Awards
nineteen twenty seven, the Army helped with the production of
a silent film you may have never heard of. It
was called Wings. It has nothing to do with the sitcom.
It was about World War One fighter pilots. This film

(15:44):
went on to win the very first Oscar for Best Picture.
So this is like a known thing, and there's a
guy named Tom Secker from outfit called Spy Culture which
does great work. He was able to compile a list.
He set out to say, like to say, let me

(16:04):
make the most comprehensive possible list of just feature films
that have employed that have benefited from this relationship. As
of his list, which was current as of twenty sixteen,
contains more than four hundred different films that were made
with some form of cooperation or collusion with the Department

(16:27):
of Defense.

Speaker 2 (16:28):
Wow, four hundred films. Now I want to add in
one extra little piece here, just that I've found Ben
and I just want to talk with you guys about it.
To my understanding, there was very much a position of
the various militaries, especially the Army, where they didn't want
to fund or work with films where the bad guy

(16:51):
wasn't extraterrestrial or a monster or some big bad thing.
For quite a long time, it was they were generally
looking at pieces that would highlight the actual military operations
or you know, possible military operations. And then when the

(17:11):
Marvel Cinematic Universe, and then a little bit before that
became so popular, they were just noticing that, well, it
doesn't matter what the opposing force is, as long as
the military itself and the operations look legitimate and correct,
and the military is placed in a good light.

Speaker 4 (17:29):
Yeah, are the protagonists are aiding the protagonists in some way,
shape or form.

Speaker 1 (17:34):
Right, they're the cavalry coming, you know what I mean?
And those I mean, those are militaristic tones or intentions
that we see in things that might not ostensibly be
war stories even or military stories, just stories that evolve
a conflict where you need the best of the best
to intervene. And who is that in the third act? Well,

(17:54):
if you play your cards right, it's the US military.
And it saves you a ton of money on production.
But as it saves you money as someone making the film,
if you live in the US, it very much does
not save you money. Spoiler alert. But this happens in
other things that I think a lot of people don't,
We don't think about. So it happens in television, It

(18:15):
happens in talk and even game shows. Like there are
so many unscripted documentaries, right because those are very inexpensive
to make. You'll see them on History Channel, Discovery Channel,
or you know when History is going through its annual
Hitler phase. There's so many documentaries about this. Of course,
the DoD keeps an eye on some of those documentaries,

(18:36):
especially if they're about something more recent like desert storm,
and they have to because they have to make sure
that nothing is being divulged. And I would say, I
would argue that is completely above board, and that needs
to happen because a lot of the people speaking in
those things have signed legal agreements that constrain what they
can say, so of course they should have final writer

(18:59):
or refusal there.

Speaker 4 (19:00):
Well, let's not forget too. I mean, we've all been
involved in podcast projects where we had to license audio,
you know of like archival footage, and oftentimes various networks
have very specific criteria for how and when they will
allow their footage to be used. I can't imagine the
military is any different, and they obviously have a lot

(19:20):
of archival stuff as well. So I wonder if possibly,
you know, if you know your documentary is portraying the
military in the right light, you could save a whole
lot of money on licensing costs by getting that stuff
gratis from the US military.

Speaker 1 (19:34):
Yeah, quite possibly.

Speaker 2 (19:35):
Or just go to fedflicks on archive dot org and
use the public domain stuff that was created with our
tax dollars, actually as our parents and grandparents' tax dollars.

Speaker 1 (19:44):
Well, they still have server costs, so we're we've got
what corporate America calls buy in. Another thing that happens
would be stutent listeners. You just sort of say game shows. Yeah,
it's true. I'm sorry if you are. If you are
very anti military for some reason and you very much
love Jeopardy, well Jeopardy is also in this big, big

(20:06):
bed with Uncle Sam Price, is right? Is there talk
shows like Ellen? If anybody still likes or listens to
Ellen or Steve Harvey? Those also all of those have
military themed episodes. Surprisingly, one thing here that could be
an episode all its own. It's spent a whole hour
on this military financed and produced music videos. Music videos

(20:34):
they come out like. There's a bevy of them that
comes out every day, especially on YouTube. And there's a
great piece by Vice journalist named Matthew Galt who says
the following, from China to Russia to a rock to
the good old US of A militaries love spending money
to produce lavishly surreal music videos. I'm going to tell
you something. There are some hard working folks on production

(20:57):
and on camera on Mike in these videovideos on the
US side. But for my money, if you want to
watch the really really elaborate, weird ones, check out the
ones from other countries Azerbaijan for some reason, China, Russia,
they all got really into hip hop too. I'm not
going to say it's all good. Maybe some is lost

(21:17):
in translation, but they're not pinching pennies on it.

Speaker 4 (21:21):
These are certainly certainly a good way to reach a
different audience, you know, that might have a tempered view
of the military. And it's essentially I mean, I wouldn't
go so far as maybe to call it propaganda, but
it's approaching that, or it can approach that.

Speaker 1 (21:36):
Right for sure. I mean, Katie Perry joins the Marines
in one particular music video The Air Force, and I
did not know this has a punk cover of its
official theme song. The Air Force also has an official band.
I think their name is like Maximum Impact or something
like that.

Speaker 4 (21:55):
That's metal.

Speaker 1 (21:56):
Yeah, right, And of course this is something I imagine
the four of us are going to be returning back
to later in the show. But of course video games
that should be a less surprising outlet. I mean, it
is very difficult to look at some of the some
of the world's most famous video games and not imagine
the military taking interest here. Although I will say one

(22:20):
note this was this was an aspect of media where
the military really struggled at first.

Speaker 2 (22:26):
Yeah, but the military has been interested in simulating anything
that they could consider like a war game or you know,
training or you know, for pilots to fly in aircraft,
to tank operators, to all this stuff. They've been interested
in making a simulation version for a long time of

(22:46):
their operations. And you know, it should be no surprise
that they wanted to get in the game as soon
as they possibly could. And just made a quick note here.
You may have heard of it but before we've mentioned
it before on this show. But a little video game
called America's Army that made its first version debut I

(23:07):
think in two thousand and two, and then there are
several versions. The latest one I'm aware of is called
America's Army Proving Ground and it went into beta in
twenty thirteen, came out and officially released in twenty fifteen.
But it's an actual game, created, developed and published by
the US Army.

Speaker 1 (23:28):
And this is completely legal, This is above board. There's
nothing wrong with this, and this is just one example
of other things. But what I like about this example, Matt,
is it's more overt and it's more apparent, because we
get into the sticky stuff when we leave the realm
of transparency, and that's where we get to what I

(23:49):
in my mind is the bloody multi billion dollar question here.
What exactly is Uncle Sam and other global versions of
Uncle Sam getting in return for this? Are they investing?
Are they really investing billions and billions of dollars worth
of labor and manpower and equipment just to make sure

(24:11):
stories are accurate and to keep an eye out for
leaked information. The answer is absolutely not. They get much much,
much more than that, and we'll tell you exactly what
they're getting or hope to get after word from our sponsor.
Here's where it gets crazy. It is so much, so

(24:35):
much more, so much more dangerous than just like accurate depictions. Like,
it's not someone going on set just to say okay,
that means we need to make sure that's an Abrams tank.
It's not just someone going onto the set of a
you know, a History Channel documentary about the Iranian Revolution

(24:57):
and saying, okay, well i'll see I said, as we
can't technically say this guy's name, so let's call them
Marty Finkelbean's or something like that. Those are but that's
not that's not near what it is. It's it is
we dropped the P word just a little bit earlier.
It is a direct avenue to the heart's minds and

(25:17):
future decisions of millions of people.

Speaker 4 (25:19):
Well, after all, if they just wanted an authenticity consultant,
they could get a retired military person that could just
you know, keep an eye on it and make sure
they got all the beats right or like everything looked accurate.
So this is something more than that, isn't it? Very much?

Speaker 1 (25:33):
So I think, yeah, yeah, that's a good point, because
I think it would be easy and in the long term,
a little less expensive to just have a retired military
member or an historian on on on the on the
set or in the writer's room of a World War
two film, to be able to raise their hand and say,

(25:54):
I hate to be that I hate to be that guy.
But Hitler was the bad one. And then so what
the producers is like? Great point, great point, herman, All right,
we'll do we'll do some rewrites. We'll do some rewrits.
But this is coming out in March. Still, okay, so
everybody hustle. You're right, Uh, the military helps out with
these productions. With that one be with one or two

(26:19):
big caveats, and those are where the problems are found.
First caveat is the military helps out with these productions
so long as and only so long as the end
result makes the military look great, a powerful cavalry, world's savers,
America's police in a way. And this, you know, you

(26:40):
can have problems with this, and you can you can
point out rightly that the US military has not always
been the good guy or has not always been saving
the world, you know, depending on who you ask. But
it does make sense, doesn't it. Why would you why
would you give all these people all this stuff. If

(27:01):
they were gonna take all of your individuals, all your
gadgets and your equipment and they were, and all your expertise,
of course, and then they were just gonna make it
look terrible. Right, how are you gonna go to your superiors?
How are you gonna end up being called into the
joint chiefs or something, and then you're the person who
greenlit the coastguard sucks or whatever, and you gave them

(27:24):
billions of dollars worth of equipment, Like, of course you're
not gonna do that. That makes sense to me.

Speaker 4 (27:30):
Yeah, And it's like, you know, we've worked in spaces
called like branded content for example, where say you're working
very closely with a brand to make a show or
a movie or something, and it's sort of an advertisement
disguised as pop culture or as cinema or as a
podcast or whatever. When you work directly with those folks,
they are very protective of how that brand is portrayed.

(27:53):
And this is no different.

Speaker 2 (27:55):
There's another thing here. It's not like the military is
getting a profit as in points on the how well
the film does right, Yeah, like points on whatever the
film takes in right. It's not like the military is
getting that kind of deal, at least I'm unaware of it.
If they are getting some kind of thing like that,

(28:15):
and I don't know how you'd handle that when it
comes to what it would be a donation to a
branch of the military or something. I don't know. But
what they are getting many times is something called like
a final look or they get you know, they get
say on the final cut essentially, where like that's what

(28:35):
we're talking about. They'll be in the room with the
editors and the director and they'll be able to say, well,
you know, you cannot you cannot do that. You cannot
make that choice and show that because it would make
us look bad.

Speaker 4 (28:48):
It sounds like a devil's bargain. Though from a creative standpoint,
doesn't it like it would be a nightmare to be
that editor with that military lays on over your shoulder, say,
I guess it's worth its way in tanks though, huh.

Speaker 1 (29:01):
I mean, yes, there is definitely a trade off here,
as there are in all sorts of mutual symbiotic relationships,
which again is what this is. But I think it
occurs in phases. So you've got the script writing idea, right,
You want military approval. How do you get military approval? Well,
first they want to know what the story is, So

(29:23):
is that a synopsis with someone they've worked with before.
Like I think a first time film in a franchise
or a first time director probably has more scrutiny on
them than say like Michael Bay coming in and saying
I want to make Transformers six. They love Michael Bay. Yeah,
then they'll be like, oh, it's Mike. This is yeah,

(29:43):
we know this guy. We know we pretty much and
this is not a ding on Transformers films, but we
pretty much know how the plot's going to go, right,
so we don't have to get a lot of scrutiny.

Speaker 4 (29:52):
We also know he's going to play ball. You know,
he's not going to like die on the hill of No.
We must show this unflawed uttering moment with the commanding officer.
It's not really on the table with the Michael Bay picture.

Speaker 1 (30:05):
Right, He's not gonna shamel on them or anything. But
this all there's another thing that happens here, and I
think it's it's something that it was something other critics
have brought up, and it's something that we have to
take some time to unpack. This provides a potential workaround

(30:26):
to other types of recruitment that might be legally, or
ethically or morally sticky when it comes to children. Right,
So the military in this country is with you in
some aspect for a lot of your life, especially if

(30:46):
you are a young man. Right this this think of
g I Joe's right. I mean the days of led
soldiers were famous. Like this happens in other militaries across
the world too. It's weird for it not to happen.
It's probably the best way to put it. And the films,

(31:06):
especially as we're such a media driven culture, the films
can function as recruitment adds. You know, anyone of anyone
who is like thirteen or older can watch a PG
thirteen movie. Right. You can't go into the recruitment office
legally and sign up for the military, but they can

(31:29):
be sending messaging to you, perhaps even the kinds of
implications where they'll come up later about the benefits of
joining up, the responsibility and the nobility of it, just
by you know, in a way that you don't consciously understand.
And that's where it gets dangerous. And also, of course

(31:51):
we need to say this. The Armed services are tremendously important.
They do a lot of good work, and this should
be taken as a ding on the people or the
groups involved here, maybe as maybe as a little bit
of ding on a Hollywood They get their own problems.
This is this is functionally like like, it's easy if

(32:13):
you're a kid in the US. It's easy for you
to be nine years old, especially now when so many
children are growing up native to the Internet and already
inundated with information. It's easy to be like nine years
old see a straight up propaganda film from World War
Two and think, geez, that's weird and in no small
way is it kind of uncomfortably racist. I'm not on

(32:36):
board with this. But then that same nine year old
might see, might see a film that does some of
the stuff we're describing, and to them that's just super cool.

Speaker 4 (32:48):
Right, Oh yeah, exactly, And like we mentioned at the
top of the show, it does start to enter into
the realm of light propaganda, which we know is a
powerful thing. Griffiths, Stephanie Stockwell, and Adam Muir had this
to say about it, quote, the military have always found
a use for entertainment, recruiting songs and marching songs, prepared

(33:10):
the soldier's mind to override the self preservation mechanism in
the heat of battle. Propaganda has always been best served
as entertainment, you know, right, even things like marching songs,
which which in the early days of the military were
a very functional thing that allowed the military to communicate
with different battalions and different groups. But it also they

(33:32):
were very patriotic, and they instilled people on the battlefield
with this like something greater than myself kind of vibe,
and when they were really bought into it, it made
them better soldiers and made them you know, borderline unstoppable. Well,
I mean stoppable by like bullets and stuff, but in
their minds they were willing to go over.

Speaker 1 (33:49):
The top, right, because you're part of something bigger than yourself.
I mean, I don't know if this happens to everybody,
but in my past it was. It was normal for
people to have instead of lullabies that were sung to them,
you were hearing marching songs, you know, one, two, three,

(34:11):
four and so on, which.

Speaker 2 (34:13):
Now that I think there's a lot of people, but the.

Speaker 1 (34:18):
Lyrics also have an age very well. So we're not
gonna we're not gonna put those out in the ether today.
But but you're right. So the question then, is is
this a viable and effective recruitment tool. The answer to
that is yes, probably, even if it's Even if it's
a little difficult to measure the performance, we know it
works because it continues to be employed. However, the next

(34:43):
question is is it ethical? Is it propaganda? Is propaganda
always bad? The the thing is the from Griffith University, Stockwell,
and you're the most important thing they say in that quote.
In my mind, is that prop is what you just said. No,
propaganda has always been best served as entertainment. People don't
like to be lectured, right. People often hate learning stuff.

(35:08):
People want to be entertained. So a preachy, stuffy lecture
about the importance of military activity, even if it's Dwighteye
as an hour coming back and doing a whole one
to eighty and saying we need this stuff around, it
can come off as like this boring political screed. But
a movie with kick ass explosions and fight scenes, and

(35:28):
like a model level attractive people, or a gut busting
comedy or an odd couple will they won't they? Romance
with a human interest story that's just like pull in
at your heartstrings left and right. That impacts your mind
in deep abiding ways that you are one hundred percent
not fully conscious of. The association game is so so strong. Well,

(35:53):
and look what.

Speaker 4 (35:53):
The military models there, actual proper ad campaigns after things
like Army of One, you know very much, look like
a video game, look like you're playing a video game.
They're like checking these boxes of these pop culture depictions
of the military in cinema and television and video games
and selling it to you that way, selling you that
image of military service.

Speaker 2 (36:14):
Well, and then just put into it the psychology that
takes us to the theater in the first place, or
gets us to turn on Netflix or Prime or whatever
our desire to identify with some character. Right, and if
that character, the protagonist whoever we're identifying with, is you know,
a military personnel or thinking about joining the military, or

(36:38):
a veteran of some kind like, and we place ourselves
as the viewers the listeners, whoever, whatever medium it is,
and we can see ourselves in that role that can
also provide something for the military.

Speaker 1 (36:51):
Oh sure, it's in everyman argument, right, that thing I
see on the screen I identify with, that's me, aren't I?
Heroic says the uh, says the audience member. And there's
then then there's a cathartic aspect to watching that victory, right,
and it's something that you will recall later, uh, when

(37:11):
you are in the situation yourself. And then we see
this other pattern. So I mentioned this earlier, but I
didn't mention it as a question. I should phrase it
as a question, why does Hollywood seem to go through
phases of depicting certain enemies? And Hollywood even isn't that accurate?

(37:32):
We should say why does the zeitgeist go through these phases?
Because it happens in video games too, like ta like
the perennial bad guy in a Western war film is
going to be the Nazis. Also Indiana Jones in the
Last Crusade, another DoD production. This this question is easily
answered with Nazis. First, they're easy to use because everybody

(37:55):
can agree they were monstrous and they did monstrous things.
But also second, they are extinct as a state level organization.
There is no way for them to like object to
their characterization, even if that characterization is like inaccurate. And
when I say inaccurate, I'm not being a Nazi apologist.

(38:15):
I'm talking about like the schlocky horror films where they say,
you know, secretly, the Nazis were really using this ancient
evil from this well in Bavaria and turning people into
zombie beetles or whatever the plot of those things might be.
That's actually the plot of several I think that I
just sort of smooshed together.

Speaker 2 (38:35):
But you know how one of the characters becomes a
walrus for some.

Speaker 1 (38:39):
Reason, right right, right, Well, that was an integral moment
in the plot. It's ss Walrus.

Speaker 4 (38:45):
It's also like one of the only ones that still
works and isn't like a bad look. I mean, look
at Disney military propaganda cartoons that had like, you know,
Asians depicted in really really offensive, terrible ways. Those do
not age well and are disavowed by you know, the
Disney Company, unless you go to the Disney Family Museum,
which is run by the trust of the Walt Disney family.

(39:08):
But Nazis are still kind of fair game.

Speaker 1 (39:10):
Yeah, you know. The thing that's important to notice here
is that we're saying Western war films, like if you
look at North Korean propaganda, can you take a wild
guest and who plays the role of the Nazis there. Yeah,
it's it's Uncle Sam. It's it's very very weird. And
the story of the guys who acted as the troops

(39:31):
in those films is also very weird. Please do check
it out if you have an interest. We saw the
Soviet Army start playing this role in times of growing
international tension during the Cold War. Right now, now, Nazis
are old beings, but the real antagonists are the Soviets.

(39:54):
And do you know who's gonna save us in the
third act? That's right, the US military.

Speaker 2 (40:00):
So it's kind of or just capitalism in general.

Speaker 1 (40:02):
Or just capitalism general, or just the monopoly man comes
through and this time he's packing. Right. But but this
what's interesting about this is, you know, Joseph Campbell would
argue that most stories are the same story, you know
what I mean, Like the concept of story is kind
of like the concept of ordering pizza. You get different

(40:26):
toppings on it, but you're still eating pizza. I don't know,
Joseph Campbell, I don't know a stance on pizza.

Speaker 2 (40:32):
But make soup like a different ingredients in a soup.

Speaker 1 (40:37):
No, no, yes, soup makes more sense on so many levels.
On like the timeline. It makes sense, the nominative determinism.
Yeah you nailed it, Okay, strike that pizza thing. Soup,
we're working live. It's still soup, is the point. So
what you see when you see a lot of these
war films, and anybody who's familiar with story structure, like

(40:59):
a reader of Save Cad or Hero a Thousand Faces,
you know this. In film as well as in many
world traditions, the story has a lot of the same beats.
You just have different people or entities slotted in. So
it's not hard. It's not difficult to slot in, especially
in work of fiction, to slot in a different thing.

(41:20):
That's why you'll see in the days of the War
on Terror, various terrorist organizations filled this role. People are
no longer fighting Nazis in the Middle East. Now they
are fighting. Now they're fighting things like isis right and
again in these works of fiction. The argument here this
applies to real life video games, music, other media. But

(41:44):
the argument here is are these productions following real world events?
Are they mirroring and responding to real world events, or
are they in some way priming the pump? Are they
pushing these events? It's a questionable tackle. After a word

(42:05):
from our sponsor.

Speaker 2 (42:12):
We've returned before you jump in. I just the last
thing you said before we went to a break, applying
it to video games and all this other media, talking
about the various enemies. I was thinking about the Call
of Duty franchise and how it began with World War
Two with the Nazis. Then you can watch it jump

(42:33):
forward to the Cold War. You can watch it jump
to terrorists. You could watch it. It's so interesting the way
it kind of goes. It jumps around to like three enemies. Basically,
it's either Russians of some sort, Soviets of some sort, Nazis,
and terrorists of some sort of a Middle Eastern country somewhere.

(42:54):
That's just how it always functions. Those are the three.

Speaker 1 (42:58):
Those are the three. It's the Holy t huh.

Speaker 2 (43:01):
And zombies. I forget about zombies.

Speaker 1 (43:02):
And zombie well, zombies like toward the end right usually.

Speaker 2 (43:07):
Well, yeah, and some of them I think are Nazis.
Correct me if I'm wrong on that, but I think
they are.

Speaker 1 (43:12):
Well, this is this is U. This leads us to
the next question, which is maybe a sensitive topic for
some of us in the audience. Today, we talked about
the power of propaganda, right, a clear motivator for this practice.
But what about the problem of recruitment, because in a way,
the military entertainment complex is meant to solve this problem.

(43:33):
Any experienced commander is going to tell you that a
military force can only be as good as the individuals
in it, only as good as its soldiers. And every
military in the world that does not have an active
conscription kind of policy or law spends a huge amount
of time and money figuring out how to recruit people,

(43:54):
overwhelmingly historically young men into their ranks, Like how do
we how do we convince you that it is your
duty and indeed your honor and your opportunity to possibly
die for people who in future generations may not appreciate

(44:15):
your sacrifice, Like this is this is a this is
a rest of your life kind of situation. This is
a career, this is a calling, This is a duty.
I accidentally reinvented the name call of duty. I am
so sorry, but I didn't mean to. But but you know,
it's a question you have to have because you have
to you have to be recruiting people. People are aging

(44:37):
out of militaries right, People are maybe experiencing injuries that
make it such that they can no longer serve even
if they wish to. So you have to find new people.
And it turns out that a blockbuster film can be
a tremendously successful recruitment tool. Like imagine, Okay, this is
an example we'll just make up. So you're a kid,

(45:00):
You're watching one of those World War two era films.
What are good World War two era films? There's a
thin red line, right, band of brothers? What's that other one?
There's another one there?

Speaker 2 (45:12):
Band of brothers is like a special right band of
brothers has It's an HBO bunch of different movies, is
it not? That's the one?

Speaker 1 (45:25):
Uh? So you see any of these? And uh another
example of a war film would be Dunkirk, right.

Speaker 3 (45:33):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (45:34):
These these are very high production, high value films, you know,
and in many ways they they they are accurate and
don't shy away from the violence that people encountered. But
let's say you're a kid watching this, maybe you're even
a little young for it. So this is serious shocking
stuff you're seeing, and while you're watching it, you're imagining

(45:54):
one of your older relatives who had told you about
his time fighting with the Alley World War two again.
People tend to want to be part of something larger
than themselves. So this movie may have been more than
a diverting hour and a half to two and a
half hours. This this film may have just made that

(46:14):
kid feel like he is pursuing his destiny, that it
is his fate to become the next in a long
line of people fighting to make the world a better place.
And I'm not saying any of that is untrue. That
very well may be true. But the kid learned about
it through a blockbuster film.

Speaker 2 (46:34):
Yeah, I'm remembering that movie Pearl Harbor.

Speaker 4 (46:38):
Now, yeah Bay, wasn't that Michael Bay.

Speaker 2 (46:42):
I don't remember who directed it. I just remember that
iconic scene and you know when it's well, I don't
I honestly don't remember much about the movie. Besides, there
were nurses involved. Ben Affleck was there, and they spent
a lot of money on you know, the depicting the
attack on Pearl Harbor. Yeah, but it's a.

Speaker 4 (47:02):
Big flag waving tent pole movie. You know, that got
slammed critically because of that very fact. It was almost
like cloyingly that thing. And that's I think why Michael
Bay is such a popular choice for some of these
situations because he you know, we know where we the
military know where we stand with Michael Bay.

Speaker 1 (47:21):
And without diving into the ideation and the genesis of
that film, there's a fair question to ask, you know,
was it Michael Bay's original idea or was he asked
to join the team? Which is again again not insidious.
That happens all the time with directors a studio as
a script they really like and they have a director,

(47:42):
they have a dream director they really want to work with,
and they want to see if they can get that
person on board.

Speaker 2 (47:48):
And they've got one more picture to make with Affleck
according to his deal.

Speaker 1 (47:51):
So I mean, yeah, right right, the Affleck deals, they
just retavoc throughout the industry. So studies show that there
are numerous factors leading to an increased likelihood of military recruitment.
What we mean by that is that if you look
at like if you look at a map of the

(48:13):
US and its various territories, you will see there are
a couple of things that correlate with someone's likelihood to
join the military. Some of these things include stuff like
painful socioeconomic background right leading to a lack of a

(48:38):
viable long term economic future. The most apparent example to
a lot of people nowadays would be something like, how
can I afford to go to college? You know what
I mean? How on earth am I supposed to compete
with those families who have intergenerational wealth and started a
college fund for their kid when the kid was like

(49:00):
negative two years old? And now you know, now I
have to try to make my own way working three jobs,
right how And unfortunately that is very common. And again,
not everybody has to go to college. I think that's
a myth that's been sold to the American public in particular.
But there are other like there are other factors like

(49:20):
to have you come from a military family, things of
that nature. All of those things, however, they exist with
a number of their own caveats, right, like not that.
What this means is that every recruitment act you make
or endeavor you set upon is going to have to

(49:42):
target people in some way that may exclude other people
you wanted to target. Right, So if you have, for instance,
if you have solely English language ads, you're going to
be missing part of the demographic, right. And that's what
makes the media so powerful, Because the military is very
much aware of the fact that everybody watches something. Right,

(50:05):
you can't yet say everybody plays something, although I think
you can in the future, but right now you can
say everybody watches something, and that means that investing in
media in this way cuts across all those social, demographic,
financial boundaries. You were speaking to everyone at this point.

(50:26):
That is something that is tremendously powerful. But it's also
been used in sneaky, sneaky ways. And there's an example,
Matt that you found, and we talked a little bit
off air about that I recall, but I really think
we should explore this. I think we owe it to
everyone to talk about this one. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (50:47):
I think this is the best example at least that
I was able to find when it comes to sponsoring,
at least or partnering maybe with an ip an intellectual
property and a big budget film franchise for recruitment purposes.
Maybe not specifically for that, but dang, finding a way

(51:08):
to really utilize recruitment in the promotion of a film.
So we have to jump to twenty sixteen and look
at the Yes, it is the sequel to Independence Day,
that nineteen ninety six movie that lives in all of
our hearts as children of at least for me of
the eighties, Welcome to Earth, as I would say to

(51:31):
all of my friends for a long long time, except
I would do it as Will Smith. The first movie
was just very, very popular, right, I mean, you guys
loved Independence Day?

Speaker 1 (51:42):
Yeah? Yeah, I did, oh on record in this episode earlier.

Speaker 2 (51:45):
Okay, I just want to make sure we're all there.

Speaker 4 (51:47):
Don't you drop a swear after saying welcome to Earth
and then punches the thing in the face.

Speaker 2 (51:51):
Yeah, yeah, dude. It's perfect badass. So when they made
a sequel for this film, part of the marketing and
the trailers they would put out the teasers it one
of There are several of these, like one of them
is a look back, essentially a tribute to the quote
War of nineteen ninety six that happened in the first movie, right,

(52:13):
And they do just such a good job world building.
They've got all the characters looking back, reflecting, talking about
what happened, how they got so far. And one of
the main pieces of them reflecting back is this thing
called the Earth Space Defense Group. And in this trailer

(52:34):
they create essentially a recruitment video for the Earth Space
Defense and they implore you, essentially as the viewer, as
this person who's watching their message in this this fake reality,
in this world of the movie, to join this thing.
And if it tells you go to a website, and
you go to this website and it's like joinesd dot com.

(52:58):
That's what it was. If you went there, you could
actually play a couple really interesting video games, some simulations
based on the movie's world. It's pretty cool. They're like
testing you out. But in order to get access to it,
you have to give the website access to your Facebook account.
Now this is twenty sixteen, okay. Also keep in mind

(53:19):
you're not signed into the movie franchise's website where you
actually are online. When you go to that link is
you've been redirected to go army dot com, which is
the US Army's recruitment site official. It's the official one.
So if you watch these trailers and they got they

(53:41):
got a ton of clicks, a ton of views for
all this content they were creating for join ESD, it
was actually the military capturing intel on viewers. It doesn't
matter how old you are. If you are old enough
to have a Facebook account, they could capture data there
and you'd go through these simulations video game style, and

(54:02):
they were lightly pushing you to join the actual army
using these skills because they're testing your skills with these
various simulations. Right, it's brilliant, and really it feels messed up.
It feels very messed.

Speaker 1 (54:15):
Up, and it's legal. Yeah, yeah, that's the problem because
the way Facebook partnerships of that kind of of that
ILK work. You know, if you've ever been to a
website and it gives you a couple of options, it's
really giving you the option of where you want where
you want your data sold. Right, So sign them with Google,

(54:36):
sign them with Facebook, or sign them with email. Takes
a second, but there's some great throwaway email services you
can use for that too if you prioritize this. So
this happens and it's not illegal, but it is sneaky
and it's not a super great look. I think we
can all agree on that, especially consider like if you're

(54:58):
a parent and your kid is on that website and
then later you start getting these mailers about the army
addressed not to the household but to like you're a
fourteen year old, then you're a little freaked out that
if that happens. We're saying that definitely did well.

Speaker 2 (55:16):
But but think about really, really think about it, guys.
It's if they came right out and the director said,
or there was a big title screen like this trailer
is presented to you by the United States Army. This
is recruitment material. Like parents probably wouldn't ever allow their

(55:37):
kids to watch it real they would I don't know.

Speaker 1 (55:39):
Well, then it seems less like entertainment, right, it's more
overt paganda. And one thing you can one thing you
can see in these films is that, especially in feature films,
in the credits at the end of the film, you
will see acknowledgment. You're never not going to see that
if the army's involved, or if the military services are evolved.
But here we go. So we've described things that are

(56:00):
perfectly legal have some troubling potential. There have been times,
just like with the Independence Day sequel trailer, where these
things went a little wrong. But the thing, the thing
here that should bother you is that it's not it's
not necessarily the process or the existence of this phenomenon,

(56:24):
as Dennis Reynolds would say, because of the implication we
did it. We finally thanks to code named Doc Holliday,
we finally squeezed an actual always suddeny Philadelphia a quote.
Don't sue us, guys, they're wealthy now, they don't need
our money.

Speaker 2 (56:40):
We gave you our money already. Okay, jeez, we we did.

Speaker 1 (56:44):
But yeah, the implication, what do you mean by that? Well,
if all this is true, and it very much is,
is it really that much of a problem. I mean,
Hollywood has never been a perfect place. Think of all
the other things. Hollywood has done things that are terrible, right,
like eighty sexual assault and sexual abuse for multiple generations

(57:06):
and just covering it up forever and ever and ever
and ever. I mean, in comparison, you could say this
seems somewhat tamed, but there are serious, lasting issues with
this arrangement. Like, here's the question. We've used the phrase
slippery slope before. I know, some people hate it. I
know sometimes it feels cliche, but you have to remember

(57:27):
things are often only called cliche because they are freaking true.
So think about this, there's a slippery slope. At what
point does consulting on or influencing the plot of a
movie script, you know, from checking for accuracy to co
writing at what point does that slide into an attack

(57:48):
on freedom of speech? Like, at what point is you know,
someone's creative voice, whether director's script writer, et cetera. At
what point is that silenced? Does this counter the same thing?
I would say technically no, but troublingly close. What do
you guys think?

Speaker 2 (58:04):
This makes me worry about the bubble that we're in
as you know, United States citizens, as Westerners, Like what
we've We've seen things that are critical of our country
and our militaries. Right Uh there, there's there's a whole
host of content that is critical in some way of

(58:25):
those institutions and those powers. But I wonder if there
are still holes in our knowledge just due to where
we live and what information we have access to, or
what is being prevented what what what is being shielded
from us just by Maybe I don't think the government

(58:46):
would do that, but maybe they do. Maybe that's that's
something that occurs in the same way that other countries
shield content from their citizens.

Speaker 1 (58:54):
Oh yeah, that's an excellent and very disturbing point, Matt.
I mean, you're not going to see the controversy about
depleted uranium rounds popping up in the next Transformers film, right,
most likely? Yeah, because then we're in a situation of
the famous unknown unknown. We don't know what we don't know? Uh,

(59:16):
And this can be this can be dangerous because a
less informed public is a less powerful public. And of course,
of course there are things that have to remain classified
because people's literal lives are on the line. But again,
how do we how do we navigate that? How do
we figure out I don't know, like, has there ever

(59:39):
been I don't know if there's ever been in the
history of public declassification in this country. I don't think
there's ever been something released that made the entirety of
the US public go wow. I wish I never knew that.
Let's pretend it never happened. People want to know things,
even if they are ugly and disturbing. Right. I tried.
I tried over the weekend to think about this. I

(01:00:02):
got bup. Gus, can you think? Can you guys think
of one?

Speaker 2 (01:00:07):
I was just one of there's a human testing thing.
But I think we all I think you know, when
Tuskegee experiments came out, when the knowledge of that came out,
I think that was exactly what you're saying, Like, thank god,
we know about it, but geez, I think that's usually
their action, just as you're saying.

Speaker 1 (01:00:25):
Yeah, yeah, the ugly truth, right, will prepare us for
the future. But second one, and if we said this
at the very beginning, another implication problem here. If you
haven't wondered about this yet over the course of this episode,
fellow conspiracy realist, who is paying for all this stuff?

(01:00:46):
If you live in the United States, congratulations, it is you.
You are, through your tax dollars, in a way, a
contributing producer to every single media product of this type.
It doesn't matter if you don't like Katie Perry, it
does not matter what you think of Michael Bay. And
if you, for some ludicrous reason, do not understand the

(01:01:07):
beauty of the original Independence Day, well, no refunds. You
already paid for it for sure.

Speaker 2 (01:01:13):
You know.

Speaker 4 (01:01:14):
I have to say, I don't even remember the existence
of Independence Day too. It's like a Mendela effect situation
for me. When was this like far removed from Independence
Day one? Or was it like how close on the
heels of that day?

Speaker 2 (01:01:27):
There was some other stuff going on in the news.
It was in twenty sixteen. The election like took over everything.
I don't know if you guys remember it took over everything.
I don't remember anything else that happened in twenty sixteen.

Speaker 1 (01:01:41):
Oh, it's got Brent Spiner in it. I remember that part.

Speaker 2 (01:01:44):
Yeah, okay, he's back at Pullman, hanging out. Uh huh,
getting like choke possessed by aliens.

Speaker 1 (01:01:54):
Yeah, that's right. You're right. So many things have happened
since twenty sixteen. You know, I was just thinking earlier
this morning, we're recording this on March first. Just hit me,
it's March again. So weird.

Speaker 2 (01:02:06):
Anyway, I need to pay for my vehicles tags. Oh no, man,
I need to get on that.

Speaker 1 (01:02:11):
Right, right, And I think we need to. I think
we might be closely wrapping today. But let's give us
some words from back to you mentioned earlier, Noel Stockwell,
and you're at Griffith University. They say the following. The
real danger for the entertainment business, which has for so
long enjoyed the benefits of free speech, is that it

(01:02:32):
is now in danger of becoming an agent for the
closure of debate. We depend on the media to use
their freedom of speech to allow a variety of opinions
to circulate, and of course that that can be dangerous
when those opinions are things like hate speech or someone saying,
you know, we're we're going to blow up the Smithsonian

(01:02:54):
as to rally the cause for the Flat Earth Society
of Northeastern District of Columbia or whatever. That's true. Again,
there's a slippery slope here, but we have to ask
ourselves what the responsibility of these folks entertaining us is.
But either way, make no mistake, this is a clear

(01:03:17):
successor to the complex that Eisenhower warned us about all
those years ago, and it is not going away. It
is going to continue evolving because it is successful. In fact,
you know, I was thinking about I can't remember which
show this was, you guys, but I remember when we
talked about the growth of AR advertising. I feel like

(01:03:39):
the US military and Uncle Sam is already much further
along this path that a lot of corporations are gonna
end up taking. I'm sure you know what I mean
by that is, I think people might see a lot
of films, which again might objectively be good, good films,
and then they might not realize that they are in

(01:04:02):
some way being served in ad Does that make sense? Oh? Yeah,
that's where we go, we're going to I think we're
going to see more and more tacitly sponsored video game products,
and then again we'll see more war films that claim
to follow the pulse of the zeitgeist. But what story
are they telling you? Is the one the director wants
you to know? Or is it one the military wants
you to hear? I don't know, what do you I mean?

(01:04:22):
What do you think? How involved should the DoD or
any government agency of any country be in the creation
of mass media entertainment. We didn't even talk about the
CIA film companies. CIA is in this too.

Speaker 2 (01:04:34):
Oh yeah, man, I swear to you. We've covered some
of this before, just in talking about propaganda and the military,
but not not in this stepth and it is worth
your time to look deeper into this stuff, especially when
you watch anything, or you play anything, or you listen
to anything where the military is involved. Just keep keep

(01:04:56):
your ears and your eyes open to what story are
actually being told outside of what the plot you know,
the baseline plot is giving you, or what the protagonist
is saying.

Speaker 1 (01:05:09):
Battleship right, amazing film, and a lot of people were
surprised that the Navy produced it.

Speaker 2 (01:05:18):
Well, even the Tom Hanks one that came out not
long ago. I think we named dropped this name dropped.
This one not that long ago. What was it called
Greyhound where he's on a battleship and he's fighting with
a U boat. I think he Tom Hanks just fighting
with this U boat.

Speaker 1 (01:05:37):
No, but it's like an ah white whale situation. Yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:05:42):
Also has an appearance from a lesser known Hank's son,
Chet Hanks, who is probably more known for his fake
Rasta Patois gaffes than he is for his acting. But
I follow him on Instagram and he made a post
about check out my dad's new movie. You can see
your boy here as on our operator in one scene.

Speaker 2 (01:06:02):
Nice, there you go, Here you go. You can also
just see the actual, you know, actual Navy stuff. Another
thing to put into context here. When you're making an
historical movie like that, it is often the director's choice,
or the studio's choice, or the writer's choice to be
as authentic as possible, so, you know, working directly with

(01:06:24):
whichever branch of the military, in this case the Navy,
to get the actual ship or the actual what the
guns actually looked like, even if it's all CGI, you know,
working directly with an institution like that to get those
things right. I mean, that's that to me is right,
I guess, the right thing to do. But it's still

(01:06:48):
it's still weird, and it it blurs the lines.

Speaker 1 (01:06:51):
So maybe maybe we say the issue here is not
necessarily that it's happening, but the issue is that there
is potential for there's potential for damaging effects to come
about as a result of this. There's potential for this
practice to in the future have consequences, and how would

(01:07:11):
those consequences come to bear. They would come to bear
in the absence of transparency. So like the whenever there's
a hidden hand, that's when things start to get dicey.
And in some cases there's very much there's a hidden
hand here. And it's not a look, it's not necessarily
that these offices of public affairs or some kind of

(01:07:32):
cloak and dag or outfit right now. It's just that
the public seems largely unaware of what's happening.

Speaker 4 (01:07:39):
Well, and it's a it's a choice that the film
production companies and studios have to make. Like we said,
it's a it's a trade off. They can either you know,
foot the bill for their own tanks or manufacture them,
fabricate them, you know, make their own version of this
stuff or CGI or they can you know, get a
big break on their budget by working a little more

(01:08:00):
closely with these offices.

Speaker 2 (01:08:01):
Right, Yeah, they can just swite it.

Speaker 1 (01:08:04):
They can just sweet they get some cardboard takes exactly exactly.

Speaker 2 (01:08:10):
Who's that director of the Michelle Gondry's That's what I
always think about. We're also not saying that joining any
branch of the military is wrong. We're just saying it
should be an educated, informed choice, Right, That's all we're saying,
Because I mean, there are varying levels of danger to

(01:08:32):
being enlisted in any arm of the military, but it
is it is much more dangerous than a lot of
other occupations. That's why I think that's why some of
this feels insidious, because the end user, the kid that
ends up signing up or enlisting, needs to understand really

(01:08:54):
what they're getting into. And it's not a video game,
and it's not some war story where you're the hero.
To me, that's the whole point of being slightly against
that stuff.

Speaker 1 (01:09:04):
Yeah, informed consent nail on the head, I'd say, delce
Et Decorah Messed that's our show, folks. We can't wait
to hear what you think. What should the role of
the DoD be here? What was your experience? Do you
feel like the depiction of the military, whether in the

(01:09:24):
US or a different country, do you feel like it
influenced maybe your decision to join or not join. If
you did join, do you feel like do you feel
like it was the right decision? Do you feel like
you were maybe misled? There's no right or wrong answer.
We just want to hear from you and we try
to be easy to find online.

Speaker 4 (01:09:42):
That's why you can find us on Facebook and Twitter
where we're Conspiracy Stuff Conspiracy Stuff Show on Instagram, and
if you want to circle back to Facebook, you can
join our Facebook group Here's where it gets crazy, where
you can join in on the conversation.

Speaker 2 (01:09:56):
Yeah, this is a great topic to discuss on. Here
is where it gets crazy. So we do highlight recommend
your head over there. If you're cool being on Facebook
and you know, giving them all your information.

Speaker 1 (01:10:06):
I thought you were just going to say if you're
cool that, if you're cool, No, nerds, I can't get
on the Facebook anymore.

Speaker 2 (01:10:15):
Yeah, sorry, nerds, No, I would never say that or yeah, okay.
If you don't want to do that stuff, we recommend
you give us a call. Our number is one eight
three three st d w y t K.

Speaker 1 (01:10:31):
You got three minutes. Those minutes belong to you. We
want them to use them as you will. It would
be helpful to us and perhaps helpful to you to
try a little bit of structure if it makes things easier. First,
tell us your name or your cool nickname that you
want us to use and whether we can use it

(01:10:51):
on air. Second, tell us the thing you want to
talk about. Third, if there's anything that's sort of just
a private message for for our crew that you don't
necessary really one out there, then that's totally fine. Just
save it for the end. And then fourth, and perhaps
most importantly, if you have an in depth topic topic,
suggestions for new stuff, or my personal favorites. But if

(01:11:13):
you have a story that is longer than three minutes,
then just write it out. Don't feel like you have
to censor or edit yourself. We want to hear from
you in full, and that's why if you have a
long story to tell us, we'd love for you to
email us. We do read all our emails, even if
we can't reply to all of them. Yet, how do

(01:11:33):
you get in touch with us? Well, all I do
is pull up a phone, a computer, or a neural implant,
depend on when you're listening to this and you think,
write or type an email out to us at our
good old fashioned address where.

Speaker 2 (01:11:48):
We are conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com. Stuff they Don't

(01:12:11):
want you to know is a production of iHeartRadio. For
more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
or wherever you listen to your favorite shows,