In political communication, Cherry Picking is a common public opinion guidance strategy, the core of which lies in reshaping the audience's cognitive framework of events through information filtering. This behavior involves complex communication mechanisms： 1. **Cognitive anchoring effect**: Establish an initial impression by intercepting specific vocabulary, such as repeatedly emphasizing extreme adjectives in the opponent's speech. Even if the complete context is disclosed in the future, the audience's initial judgment will still have a continuous impact. Psychological experiments have shown that the first-cause effect can increase the influence of fragment information by more than 40%. 2. **Framework reconstruction technology**: By stripping away the original context, speech is re-embedded in a new narrative framework. For example, the technical expressions in economic policy discussions are placed under the framework of people's livelihood issues, and the audience's value judgment dimension is changed. Communication studies have shown that framework reconstruction can shift audience attitudes by up to 35%. 3. **Emotional arousal strategy**: Screen vocabulary with high emotional load for viral dissemination. Neurobiology found that fragments of information with emotions of anger or fear spread 6 times faster in social media than neutral information, and can activate the rapid decision-making mechanism of the amygdala. 4. **Information asymmetry creation**: By creating an "iceberg effect", the audience mistakenly believes that the intercepted clip represents the overall position. Big data analysis shows that when selective citations are combined with algorithm recommendations, the probability of the audience actively retrieving the complete context is less than 12%. 5. **Semantic field distortion**: Use the ambiguity of language to reinterpret. For example, the technical term "structural adjustment" is reconstructed as "benefit deprivation", and different associative clusters are activated through semantic networks. The computational linguistics model shows that keyword substitution can fluctuate policy approval ratings by 18%. It is important to be wary that such operations can undermine the rational basis of public discussion. Data from the Center for Political Communication Research at Harvard University show that the systematic use of selective citations can reduce social consensus by 27% and the group polarization index by 41%. From the perspective of communication ethics, building a fact-checking mechanism based on a complete context, improving public media literacy, and establishing a traceability labeling system for speech are necessary measures to maintain a healthy public opinion ecology.