Card stacking is the deliberate organization and presentation of material that makes one position look good and another look bad. This usually involves suppressed evidence and a certain amount of staging and timing.

Explanation:

Card stacking utilizes many different techniques of staging and timing that "lead the audience down the primrose path." This can include theatrical devices, editing, spotlighting, music.

Use of buzzwords to give people the impression that one group or idea is good and the other is bad. For example, "access," "stigma," "progressive," "diversity," "crisis," show a pattern that (1) preempts issues rather than debate them, (2) set one group on a different moral and intellectual plane, or (3) evade issues of personal responsibility. (Thomas Sowell, Vision Of The Anointed, p. 183)

Examples:

(i) "Those members of the generation of greed need to pay their fair share, so we're asking them to pay higher taxes."

(ii) Calling jobs which are paid for by taxpayers "public service" stacks the deck by making it sound as though anyone doing these jobs cares deeply for the public and it is a sacrifice for them to do these jobs.

(iii) A movie where the hero is also an anti-nuclear advocate, and the villain just happens to be a political conservative. (This is the standard approach.)

(iv) A current events program where three of the guests plus the host are liberal, while there is only one conservative guest. (This is standard procedure among virtually all the media. There are exceptions, but not many.)

(v) For a quarter century Americans have been told that pro-choicers are "caring" people and pro-lifers are grim warriors, driven by their dehumanizing religious dogma, aren't.

Proof:

Look for organization, questions, language, or other devices that ensure that the audience will accept one point of view over another. Note that these techniques have nothing to do with the merits of the arguments.