Digital Ventriloquism

28 Mar

Our Next President? [courtesy of Google Images]

Our Next President?
[courtesy of Google Images]

Milli Vanilli was a famous, two-man signing act in the late 1980s and early 1990s.  Their fame turned to infamy when the two performers confessed that they didn’t actually sing any of the vocals heard on their records and lip-synced their live performances. They sang, they danced, they moved their mouths–but they didn’t really sing the songs we heard.

Twenty years ago, that deception was big news.  The American public was shocked that any “performers” would dare to execute such a fraud.  And some Americans were amazed that that audio technology would allow such fraud.

Today, the audio technology that allowed Milli Vanilli to deceive America seems as old news as Photoshop.  Who’s surprised that digitized audio files or 2-dimensional images can be can be edited or used to deceive?  Virtually no one.  Fifth graders aren’t surprised or impressed by such technology.

But, who among us imagines that current video technology not only allows  the manipulation of digitized, moving video images in order to completely falsify the words seemingly spoken by the subject of the video–but also allows that manipulation to take place in real time?

It’s now possible for digital editors (ventriloquists, of sorts) to put words in your digitized mouth–as you speak.  Thanks to digital tech, a speaker can be reduced to the status of a digital Charley McCarthy while the ventriloquist puts digitized words in his mouth.

Implication:  You can’t trust video recordings of people talking.  If you don’t see someone speaking with your own eyes and hear them with your own ears, you can’t be sure that any digitized image and sound is an honest representation of whatever was really done or said.

I suspect that, in retrospect, this new video tech will be viewed a culture-changing moment.  Almost all of our information comes to us as digitized images and digitized sound.  If we can’t trust those digitized images and sound that fill the internet, how will we learn?  What source of information can we rely on?  Books?  Only our own eyes/ears?   Who will we trust, if we can’t rely on the talking heads on TV and the internet?

If the era of automatic trust is just about over, how will a distrustful society hold together?

I suspect that, over the next 5 to 20 years, much of America’s energy will be spent trying to discover what’s real, what’s fraudulent, how to verify the information we’ve encountered and learning who can we trust.

Our trust in news reporting has been falling for some time.  Even so, we’ve still mostly taken it for granted that we can trust our news images.  That presumption is now dying.

How long before we have a President who doesn’t need a teleprompter to find the words the public wants to hear but instead relies on a digitized “ghost speaker” to say those words and make the President appear to say them?  In fact, how long before we elect a President who doesn’t actually exist, except as an idealized digital image?   (For that matter, has anyone ever actually seen Obama?)

video   00:06:35



Posted by on March 28, 2016 in Fraud, Technology, Video


Tags: , ,

10 responses to “Digital Ventriloquism

  1. Erin

    March 28, 2016 at 4:26 AM

    Jerimah 17:5 cursed is the man who trusts in man. `~The only word we can trust is Gods in the KJB. ;)

  2. palani

    March 29, 2016 at 4:26 AM

    Max Headroom was an advance enemy scout.

  3. Frank

    March 29, 2016 at 3:38 PM

    Video is gone

    • Adask

      March 29, 2016 at 7:43 PM

      You’re right. It’s gone. I can’t find a duplicate on YouTube.

      Perhaps the video was removed for copyright purposes. Or maybe someone didn’t want us to see that video.

  4. dog-move

    March 29, 2016 at 4:06 PM

    the spellcasting tactics of the 80’s were very effective in hyp-knot-izing a unsuspecting population globally. the evidence of the effectiveness is ever present, here we are– the songtracts in most places of retail businesses play the mix of oldies/80’s as it confuses most with it’s repetitious serpentine beat. it works well with the hyper- high fructose saturated bodies and minds–spend-spend- spend-consume-comsume-consume– obey!
    it’s poison rythym is just as toxic as the poison in the aluminum cans.
    anyone in the pop culture of commercial entertainment, religion, politics, yes, even Trump obediently read and/know their lines. it,s all fake and a big-big lie.
    Dueteronomy 18:10 warns us—“There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, 11 Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.
    The entire retail entertainment industry is the glue that makes the entire debt system stick to the consumer mindset. it’s magic!
    1. The art or science of putting into action the power of spirits; or the science of producing wonderful effects by the aid of superhuman beings, or of departed spirits; sorcery; enchantment. [This art or science is now discarded.]
    2. The secret operations of natural causes.
    Natural magic, the application of natural causes to passive subjects, by which surprising effects are produced.magic, attributes to spirits a kind of dominion over the planets,and to the planets an influence over men.

    Superstitious or geotic magic, consists in the invocation of devils or demons, and supposes some tacit or express agreement between them and human beings.

    1828 edition of Webster’s American Dictionary of the English Language

  5. gloria

    March 30, 2016 at 7:25 PM


  6. Ralph P. Torello

    March 31, 2016 at 8:16 AM

    This one really got me… The Muslim one (above post) didn’t, but this one certainly did… I mean, I know the entire George Bush and Barrack Obama “phenomenon” were just a bunch of spliced videos about almost nothing, but do you think that perhaps the entire Donald Trump, Hillary & Ted Cruz really are just complete computer generated nonsense? When you watch FoxNews here on the TV at McDonald’s (I sold my 55″ flat-screen a while ago), Trump literally has about 5 or 6 different facial expressions – is the entire thing just Pixar Corporation?

    Watch them – there are about 4 or 5 hand gestures that Trump makes, and 7 or 8 facial expressions associated with his “computer sprite.”. Is the whole thing a TOTAL LIE???

  7. gloria

    April 1, 2016 at 6:55 PM


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s