As if gagging milbloggers, posting to its own lame blog, denying embeds and writing silly editorials weren’t enough, now the Pentagon is preparing to get into “news” production in a big way, all part of its effort to spin the Iraq War. So says Defense Tech pal Paul McLeary (and former embedded reporter) from the Columbia Journalism Review Daily:
An Associated Press story yesterday discussed a new DoD memo one of its reporters got a hold of that said that “new teams of people” at the Pentagon “will begin working to ‘develop messages’ for the domestic 24-hour news cycle.“
But what might that mean? CNN.com followed up, and reported that the new operation is to have four branches: New Media, Rapid Response, TV and Radio Booking, and Surrogates. The idea is to massage the domestic media coverage of the war and of the Pentagon in general.
For example, the New Media branch will create “products and distribut[e] information” for the Internet, as well as through podcasting, DVDs and Web sites, including YouTube. Rapid Response will “Develop messages and products for the 24/7 media cycle.” For example, CNN says that “In recent weeks, there has been an increase in Pentagon-written letters to the editors of dozens of news organizations.” The TV and Radio Booking branch will “provide civilian and military guests for cable network and radio programs,” while Surrogates will “Provide information and visibility to the surrogate community” — which presumably means getting analysts to go on TV to express support for Pentagon programs, or for Rummy himself.
Read the whole sordid tale here.
–David Axe
What’s sordid about it? I looked at all those links, and all these ideas were kicked around last April at the MILBLOG Conference and afterward at Grim’s Hall.
DoD is on it’s ass in the INFOWAR, meanwhile CNN/ABC/NBC/PMSNBC/SeeBS/NYT/WAPO/LAT/al Jazeera are enthusiastic force multipliers for the other side, cheerfully sapping the will of the electorate to continue the mission.
Finally, some domestic counter-psyops!
And you think that is a bad thing?
The mainstream media’s adversarial stance, both here and abroad, means that whenever a foreign enemy challenges us, he will know that his objective will be to win the battle not on some faraway bit of land but among the people who determine what we read and watch.
I’m glad the commentors have a rational point of view if not the blogger! CNN gets marched around by Hezbolla PR experts taking staged photos, America’s media plays a snuff film of American soldiers getting sniped and that’s ok, but heaven forbid the DoD try and do a little positive PR of it’s own!
Come on!
Sounds like its going to be censorship. Dont think you can call it counter psyops. Im glad our armed forces protect our constitutional right of freedom of the press, them being the defenders of our constitution and all of that.
I wonder if the DoD will force newsmakers to host these government propagandists I wonder if all military personnel will HAVE to speak the mind of the propaganda machine from now on.
Well, there’s nothing wrong with all the letters to the editor in the world, but remember that domestic psyops — intentionally giving out false (as opposed to incomplete) information to domestic media — is illegal.
Mike,
I’ve been to Iraq seven times in two years. As such, I feel qualified to comment on the war. And I happen to agree with most of what the so-called mainstream media reports. The media is not anti-war. It might be anti-this-war, however — but for good reason. The Bush Admin launched the war on lies.
The reason that the MSM take on Iraq differs from the military’s is that the MSM sees Iraq from a much broader perspective than soldiers do. Also, foreign correspondents tend to be very well-traveled people who sympathize with non-Americans more than soldiers do. Big reporters are citizens of the world. So they’re less prone than most to patriotic chest-thumping.
I’m not going to play into the debate over whether the domestic media are anti-war or not, but I will say this: Having the military propagandize the American people is a bad idea.
Rumsfeld needs to realize information operations are not about quantity or quality, they are about honesty and integrity. Snapping off “fact-checking” or “myth-busting” memos in response to every bit of unfavorable news floating around the internet or subsidizing friendly authors won’t build integrity. It will make the armed services look like a bunch of biased hacks.
If you think popular support for the Iraq War is at a nadir now, what do you think will happen when the DOD tries to sell misleading information to the American public? It would destroy the reputation of the most trusted institutions in this country, the uniformed military.
I’m not wild about this at all. Our troops are doing a herculean job trying to hold a normally untenable situation together in Iraq. The last thing we need is for the bottom to drop out on their respected position in American life.
David it’s amazing that you feel the media is getting it right, based upon when you were in Iraq.
I only spent a year in Iraq, but I remember reading Defensetech when I was there. You guys often got it wrong-even when you were there right on top of things.
That was really sad.
But-Gee, you’re still saying the war was sold on lies, when we all know that it was based upon info EVERYONE thought was correct. It seems insane that we have to re-hash that.
David, You’re the media, you’re entitled to get it wrong! That’s your job-but don’t get all high and mighty suggesting foreign journalists are smarter or superior to your readership, or that big reporters are entitled to act like idiots.
It’s funny part of the reason the Department of Defense has adopted this policy is Defenstech.
Did I miss something? Where in the piece does the DoD say they will be faking news or fabricating lies for public consumption?
This DefenseTech article is exactly *why* the military sees a need to have a media voice. The writer reflexively assumes that anything the military has to say is inherently a lie. Nope, no agenda-driven bias there!
Now multiply that mindset by a million newspaper editors and CNN hosts and you can see why the military doesn’t think it’s getting a fair shake in the press. And who can blame them?
Since the MSM has taken up the cause of supporting our enemies, the military recognizes the urgent need to balance the scales by getting it’s message out. It’s about time.
After more than two decades of studying Information War (and inventing the term), the U.S. Department of Defense has finally gotten its act together. Taking a tip from it’s own combat doctrine, the Department of Defense has formed a special unit to hunt down and correct inaccurate media reporting on the war effort. Calling it “Setting the Record Straight,” the basic drill is to identify inaccurate news stories that are gaining some traction, and to shoot them down with blunt corrections from the White House press office.
The current situation is what the military calls a “target rich environment.” The reporting, especially on the war in Iraq, has long since veered off into fantasyland. This gets in the news from time to time when the media bothers to ask some of the troops how it’s going. In addition to getting some very accurate information (which most mass media are not interested in releasing), there are also comments along the lines of, “what are you (the media) talking about?” Most of the troops have Internet access, and then they check out the mass media coverage of the war, they have to wonder if there’s another Iraq out there, where a different situation exists.
The Department of Defense hasn’t said how they expect the media to react to this return fire approach. Because of the growing alternative media (blogs, especially), the mass media cannot just ignore (“bury” is the term of art) the refutations from the Department of Defense. So all this to-and-fro may get very interesting.
Cannoneer — I get your point, but I am still dubious about the efficacy of this program for two reasons.
First, the military has not played the role of report since the birth of the information revolution. I’m not sure how receptive the American public will be to the idea of the Defense Department getting involved in the news game.
Second, the military shouldn’t have to shill for the White House. Their job is to report the details of their operations truthfully and without spin. We shouldn’t waste their time with correcting ‘erroneous’ news items.
Well, that, David Axe, is a lot of frequent flyer miles you racked up. Do you use them personally or do they go to the company?Do you generally go native or travel with a group?Have you gotten to the point where you cab identify locals by their clothing or is it all a mystery? Too many questions for ya, I know, but still, It’s a discussion so any answer as to your situation in Iraq could possibly reveal and clarify the situation on the ground,I Believe we are in the middle of a global jihad but lots’a folks are just pissed we can’t get universal health care like the europeans.I think the chances are good for local groups to combine their efforts and save hard earned dollars by joining forces to buy insurance like any other group.For Instance, Any Sports related individuals can get together with other spots people and create an ever widening group of members interested in forming a group for the sole purpose of insurance.Mr. Axe, May we get in on your deal? I’d like to visit Iraq> Ihear Iraq is lovely this time of year, especially in the suburbs>656408
Well, RobotEconomist, the Information Operations battlespace cannot be forfeited to the enemy because you are dubious. Al Qaeda’s IO strategy has been brilliant. What was done to Spain in 2004 has now been done to us.
The military’s job is whatever the Commander-in-Chief says it is. Your attitude towards military efforts to counteract enemy psychological operations directed at the American domestic target audience to effect regime change and spead defeatism is an example of how well the multicultural, transnational progressive “citizen of the world” main stream media has prepared the IO battle space for the enemy.