Predictive Programming: Creepy Media Foreshadowing or Harmless Coincidence?

Were we warned of events like 9/11, 7/7 and the sinking of the Titanic before they happened? The Coincidence Theorist Investigates…

The Theory

What Is ‘Predictive Programming’?

Predictive programming, a theorised method of mass mind control, proposes that people are conditioned, through works of fiction, to accept planned future scenarios.

Researcher Alan Watt defines this phenomenon as “the power of suggestion using the media of fiction to create a desired outcome”. Watt’s work on this topic is excellent and should definitely be checked out.

How Would It Work?

Details of pre-planned societal changes are intentionally revealed to the masses through various forms of media. Propagandists use this type of foreshadowing as a means of pre-emptively minimising resistance. Repeatedly exposing the public to the same specific themes should wear them down into a state of passive acceptance. By the time said changes start to manifest in reality, few will even think to question the developments, let alone rebel against them.

Fiction is the vehicle used to deliver these “predictions” for an important reason. When most people watch a film for example, they see it as a benign form of entertainment and nothing more. Therefore, as the viewer’s guard is lowered, messages can bypass the normal critical thinking process and download directly into the subconscious like a virus.

For predictive programming to work as a valid form of psychological conditioning, the following set of general rules and assumptions have to be made:

  1. A group of powerful people (with a common agenda) might be able to exert a special influence over the entertainment industry.
  2. People are less likely to resist societal developments that they’ve already been familiarised with.
  3. The messages planted within fiction can vary in terms of their subtlety, ranging from subliminal clues to important plot points.
  4. Although predictive programming prepares people for large social change, specific events can also be foreshadowed.
  5. The exact contexts of the “predictions” (and the subsequent reactions of the characters within the story) aren’t strictly important.

This last assumption in particular has garnered much criticism. After all, it seems reasonable to assume that if a protagonist was shown rebelling against a future dystopia, the viewer would emulate the protagonist’s behaviour and rebel against it too. Encouraging resistance and rebellion would of course defeat the point of predictive programming.

However, it could be argued that this line of thinking is giving the general public too much credit. For example, in Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, he couldn’t have painted a more chilling vision of the Big Brother surveillance state. He warned us of an impending totalitarian nightmare where people were watched and monitored during every waking (and sleeping) moment. He also depicted the protagonist, Winston, going to great lengths to subvert the control system he found himself trapped in.

Yet here we are in an undeniably creepy 2015 and any meaningful resistance seems to be strangely absent. We might occasionally mutter “this is bloody Orwellian” when surveillance measures are increased, but before you know it we’re back in front of our smart TVs (telescreens), playing with our smartphones and fiddling with our smart meters.

"Why did nobody warn us?!"

“Why did nobody warn us?!”

What Would Be The Point?  

Reducing Resistance And Scepticism By Familiarisation:

From the perspective of a controller or social engineer, predictive programming would be invaluable. You could prepare a population for future social or technological transitions by gently washing notions over them, as opposed to suddenly hitting them with seemingly radical and unfamiliar measures.

Concepts that may have originally seemed outlandish or drastic start to become accepted as distant possibilities in the minds of the public. Eventually, as people are continuously bombarded with the same familiar themes, these “distant possibilities” start transforming into “likely possibilities” and even “acceptable outcomes”.

Zombie-fiction is perhaps an extreme example of this. Just imagine how many people have secretly conjured contingency plans for zombie-apocalypse-type-scenarios, despite only ever seeing these events occurring within the realms of fantasy.

"Better safe than sorry."

“Better safe than sorry.”

Self-Fulfilling Prophecy:

Perhaps dystopian fiction isn’t designed to warn the masses of a nightmarish future at all, but is instead meant to hammer home a sense of inevitability regarding these bleak outcomes. If even the most courageous fictional heroes fail to avoid such a miserable existence, what chance do we have?

This effect could be likened to a large-scale version of self-fulfilling prophecy. Tell people enough times that they’re destined to live as microchipped serfs under a one-world government and eventually their own beliefs (and behaviour) might start to reflect this hopeless prophecy. Once these cynical expectations of the future have been firmly established, a disillusioned population will not be surprised when these depressing predictions start to come true.

“This was always bound to happen.”

Control Of The Imagination:

Consider what could be achieved if the “fiction” you create becomes a precursor to “fact”. Since your brand of fiction can manipulate a population’s perception of what is likely to happen, you have essentially gained control of their imagination. When control of the imagination has been achieved, you can set the boundaries of what is possible and when – thus allowing you to map out the fate of an entire people.

Here’s an experiment to try for yourself. Envision society 200 years from now. Imagine it any way you want and make it as fantastic as possible. Go on, be inventive! Okay, let’s see… Does your idea of the future include space travel? Aliens? Artificial intelligence? Robots? Cyborgs? Hover Cars? Self-tying laces? Only when you stop to ponder this for yourself do you realise that your imagination has been severely limited by the science fiction you’ve been exposed to.


The reasoning behind predictive programming may not even be entirely practical. Some have suggested that, like a stereotypical villain revealing his master plan to the protagonist, the social engineers feel obliged to disclose their intentions to the population before they act. Many have speculated on the potential reasons for this but I won’t delve into that here.

Some Examples Of How Predictive Programming Might Work

Preparing The Audience For Significant Events And “Disasters”:

In the 1998 blockbuster, The Siege’, New York is attacked by terrorists and is subsequently locked into a state of martial law. Could this have prepared viewers for The World Trade Center attacks and the controversial legislation that followed, such as the USA Patriot Act, the “President’s Surveillance Program”, and the creation of the US Department of Homeland Security?

“Freedom is history”

  • In the pilot episode of ‘The Lone Gunmen’, an X-Files spin-off that aired on FOX six months before 9/11, the plot featured the theme of hijacked planes attempting to crash into the World Trade Center. The episode even revealed that the hijacking was perpetrated by the US government as part of an elaborate conspiracy.
  • In the 2004 BBC programme, ‘Panorama: London Under Attack’, a fictional scenario was presented in which terrorists detonated three bombs on the London Underground and a fourth bomb in the streets above. One year later, as part of the 7/7 attacks, “terrorists” detonated three bombs on the London Underground and a fourth bomb in the streets above. Were those who watched the Panorama episode preconditioned to accept the events that took place on 7/7?
  • The 1898 Novella, Futility, told a story in which a giant “unsinkable” ship (with too few lifeboats) called Titan crashed into an iceberg and sunk 400 nautical miles from Newfoundland. In 1912, a giant “unsinkable” ship (with too few lifeboats) called Titanic crashed into an iceberg and sunk 400 nautical miles from Newfoundland. Were those who read Futility preconditioned to accept the events that unfolded 14 years later?

    Don't worry about it.

    Don’t worry about it.

  • Someone who watched Kubrick’s mesmerising ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ in 1968, probably had little reason to doubt the authenticity of the moon landing images they saw just a year later in 1969.

    "Haha! They actually bought it?!"

    “Haha! They actually bought it?!”

  • Someone who watched ‘Armageddon’ is likely to believe in the threat of a disastrous meteor impact, simply because the concept is familiar to them and they have subconsciously accepted such a catastrophe as a genuine possibility.

    "An asteroid?! What? Like in Armageddon?!"

    “An asteroid?! What? Like in Armageddon?!”

  • Someone who tolerated ‘World War Z’ was not only exposed to the much-repeated theme of deadly pandemics, but was also conditioned to accept that a vaccine from the World Health Organisation might be humanity’s only hope of survival.
    Seems legit.

    WHO will save us??

    Introducing Controversial Technology:

  • A person who watched ‘Minority Report’ in 2002 might be less alarmed when technologies such as facial recognition, retina scanning, driverless cars, predictive crime-fighting and personalised advertising start to become commonplace in their own reality.
  • Those who grew up seeing their Star Trek heroes using “communicators” were familiarised with the idea of handheld communicative technology long before cell phones were introduced.
  • Children who grow up watching lovable robots in films might be less resistant to the expansion of artificial intelligence in the future. The same could be said for young men who are constantly fed images of smoking-hot fembot babes.


    So risky... but so hot!

    So risky… but so hot!

  • Someone who has watched their favourite crime drama hero solve horrific cases using DNA databases and invasive surveillance techniques might support such measures in their own future in order to “keep everyone safe”.

    “Thank god we installed those live-stream cameras in everyone’s bathrooms, or we would never have caught that really bad person.”

    “Thank God we installed those live-stream cameras in everyone’s bathrooms, or we would never have caught that really bad person.”

  • Did ‘Robocop’ prepare people for police militarisation and the introduction of robotic policing?
  • Even a Futurama fan might have been subtly preconditioned to accept the concept of microchip implants.
    "Oh go on then..."

    “Oh go on then…”


Curiously, no other theme seems to be repeated more than those based on alien contact and alien invasion. Regardless of your personal views on the subject, it’s interesting to note that the belief in extra terrestrials has skyrocketed as generations have passed. Researcher Eric Dubay summarises this “alien predictive programming” with a brilliant anecdote on his website


So, could predictive programming be used to manipulate people’s perceptions and familiarise them with predetermined agendas?

“No. It’s all just rubbish. Don’t worry about it,” says The Coincidence Theorist. “All of the examples above are just pure coincidence and shouldn’t be investigated further. Societal rulers have never used the mass media as a vehicle for propaganda and they never will. What’s on the box tonight then?”


(Want to see an example of subliminal media foreshadowing? Check out my article/video:  ‘9/11 “Predicted” In The Simpsons?’)


(Visited 45,403 times, 6 visits today)
13 replies
  1. Johnny Timmy
    Johnny Timmy says:

    If you think this is all coincidence instead of conspiracy plotting (given the amount of times through history these things happen..)You’re just simply a scared, delusional bitch that can’t come to terms with reality.

    • Karateprincezzz
      Karateprincezzz says:

      These are definitely not coincidental, all these events have been carefully planned by the government and whoever is above the government.Although I don’t think its appropriate to call the writer of this article a bitch, but if he like you said thinks this is coincidental then he is wrong.
      And reality is that the whoever is in charge of everything likes to tell people what he is going to do in movies and in games, my advice would be to leave the cities, as Ellen G White said “we should go to the MOST desolate places.

    • Karateprincezzz
      Karateprincezzz says:

      Johnny, I just read this again and I can’t see where the person who wrote this thinks it it coincidental, he is simply stating all the movies that have predicted something, and it was a very good article.
      I hope you don’t think that he thinks this is a coincidence because of his name the “Coincidence Theorist” because that would be ridiculous.

  2. Lady vanderQ
    Lady vanderQ says:

    You do realize that causation can go both ways? Also, that there may be a far subtler more occult reason for these synchs?

  3. Anonymous
    Anonymous says:

    What about Schindler’s List, a movie about the Holocaust released mere months before the Rwandan genocide? (or here in Australia, less than a month before the genocide.)

  4. Josh
    Josh says:

    Bible says, “Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” maybe the rules of the grate controversy between Christ and Satan mean Satan has to reveal his plans too.. Another good reason not to watch TV an Movies anyway


Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] Predictive Programming: Creepy Media Foreshadowing or Harmless Coincidence? […]

  2. […] media researcher Alan Watt who runs the Coincidence Theorist blog defines “predictive programming” as a, “theorised method of mass mind […]


  4. […] This unethical and illegal pattern and practice compounds damage done by media censorship and ‘predictive programming.’ […]

  5. […] What is predictive programming? It seems to be a type of behavioral conditioning whereby, having placed some level of trust in one who presents a story, or information (or a purported prophecy), a subject receives subtle suggestions predetermined by the speaker, storyteller, (or clergy). The subject may be aware or unaware of the suggestion. According to behaviorist thinking, a sense of excitement or danger, as can be found in the climactic scene of a movie, can cause the subject to be more susceptible to the internalizing of predetermined suggestions. For viewers of televised so-called news reports, a heightened emotional state such as anger, fear or dread can also produce such susceptibility. Later, when presented with an actual situation upon which the predictive programming has been modeled, desired behavioral responses can more easily be induced in the subject person or population.  It has been suggested that deliberately induced psychological trauma can create even more susceptibility to suggestion and control over behavior.  A good explanation of predictive programming can be found here (but I recommend skipping the article’s embedded video) […]

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply to David Cancel reply
