First of all, thank you for sharing this website. It is certainly very interesting.
"Control" can be defined as:
>: to direct the behavior of (a person or animal) : to cause (a person or animal) to do what you want
Merriam-Webster
>6. the act or power of controlling; regulation; domination or command:
Dictionary.com
>The power to influence or direct people’s behavior or the course of events:
Oxford Dictionaries.
These are all extremely broad definitions, which range from mild influence to complete dominion. Yet, when people hear the term "mind control" they immediately imagine nefarious devices and techniques geared towards completely altering a person's personality and mental processes. The thing is, one does not need to completely deconstruct and then reconstruct an individual in order to get them to do what one wants, one merely needs to find the most adequate spot to apply pressure and do so discreetly and continuously.
All forms of argumentation might be qualified as mind control, as they have as a goal to direct the opinions (and consequentially, the behavior) of the person with whom one is arguing. This, along with most ends of communication, can be classified as "soft" mind control, in the sense that those who engage in it do not do so intentionally, but simply because that is how human communications work. The most common types of mind control range from simple advertising to cult recruiting, and are based on the same principles as soft mind control (including linguistics and psychology), but these principles are explored in an intentional and dedicated way, their use is hidden from the target and they have a clear goal. We could call this "focused" mind control. Finally, there is what most people imagine when they read the term: hypnosis, drugs, electromagnetic stimuli of the brain, and so on. These differ from the previous set of tactics in that they don't target so much the individual's psyche as much as his physical brain, and in other ways which you can imagine. I'm not sure what I would call this last set of techniques.
The research that goes into mind control is likely directed at making focused techniques become more like soft ones. The importance of this is better explained with an example:
Imagine you are in a shopping mall where you will meet your friend for a movie. While going towards the place where you agreed to meet, you are approached by a woman who is selling make-up, and she begins telling you about all the good things about this particular brand, why you should try it, why it is better than most brands and so on. You politely decline her offers to learn more about the brand and go on your way. You meet your friend at the food court and you start chatting before the movie. After a while, she tells you about this great make-up brand that she discovered and why she likes it so much. You are genuinely interested in what she has to say, and after a while she convinces you to try it. We can suppose, for the sake of argument, that both the saleswoman and your friend are referring to the same brand.
Why did the saleswoman fail to get your attention while you gladly listened to your friend? Why were the saleswoman's attempts at telling you the positive traits of this brand rejected when you eagerly paid attention to your friend telling you the same thing? The science of mind control is centered on questions such as these. Perhaps it is because you believe that your friend is being genuine on her appraisal and the woman is not. Perhaps you believe that your friend has your best interest in mind, but the saleswoman doesn't. There are already ways of overcoming obstacles like these (such as carefully crafting the character of the presenter, appealing to authority and so on), but the science of propaganda still has some things to be improved upon. When the line between intentional persuasion and casual conversation is completely destroyed, then the propaganda machine will be in complete control.
One last thing to be mentioned is that vulnerability to manipulation is inversely proportional to the belief that one can be manipulated. That is to say, the more sure we are that we are invulnerable to these tactics, the more likely it is that we will not recognize their effects on us. No one is invulnerable to mind control, no matter how smart, perceptive and critical we think we are. I forget who said it that "no one who has ever been effectively brainwashed has been convinced that they have been brainwashed".
The example is purposely exaggerated. You can substitute "make-up" for "video-game" and tell the same story, in case you find it too hard to accept the premise of the original.