We all know how the popularity of blogs has exploded over the last few years, and were all also tired of hearing how some corporate fat cat has decided it makes for good business to jump into the blog world with his or her own ruminations.
No one reads those blogs. Why? Because theyre not credible.
Well, heres another one for you. And Ive got to say, Im torn on whether this is a good idea or not.
According to a short story by Walter Pincus in the Washington Post, the State Department has a small crew of Arabic speakers whose job is to zorch around the internet and dive into Islamic and mid-East-oriented blogs when they take a nasty, anti-American turn.
The State Department, departing from traditional public diplomacy techniques, has what it calls a three-person, “digital outreach team” posting entries in Arabic on “influential” Arabic blogs to challenge misrepresentations of the United States and promote moderate views among Islamic youths in the hopes of steering them from terrorism.
The department’s bloggers “speak the language and idiom of the region, know the culture reference points and are often able to converse informally and frankly, rather than adopt the usually more formal persona of a U.S. government spokesperson,” Duncan MacInnes, of State’s Bureau of International Information Programs, told the House Armed Services subcommittee on terrorism and unconventional threats on Thursday.
“Because blogging tends to be a very informal, chatty way of working,” MacInnes said, “it is actually very dangerous to blog.” So State has a senior experienced officer, who served in Iraq, acting as supervisor and discussing each posting before it goes up. “We do not make policy,” MacInnes added.
The State Department team’s approach is to join a blog’s conversation, often when it turns to the motivation for U.S. policy toward Iraq, and when others are claiming that the U.S. occupation is meant to help Israel or to secure oil. “Our job is to address that motivation issue and show them that that’s not the motivation,” MacInnes said.
But it seems to me States internet commandos are well aware that they could be raked over the coals, and theyre careful in how they approach the blogosphere.
Even though the State Department employees were not going into hard-core terrorist sites, the worry, MacInnes said, was that after identifying themselves and using their own names, “we would be, in the parlance of the Internet, ‘flamed’ when we come on” — meaning their entries would be subjected to intense attacks.
They were not, and there were such posts as, “We don’t like your policies but we’re sure glad you’re here talking to us about it,” MacInnes said. As a result, State is expanding the team to six speakers of Arabic, two of Persian and one of Urdu.
To prove that it, too, can plug into the modern media world, the Pentagon’s Central Command has a blogging operation at its headquarters. Its Joint Forces Command also has the capability and has even written a brochure on how to do it. “It’s an area we’re moving into,” Navy Capt. Hal Pittman, acting deputy assistant secretary of defense for joint communications, told the House panel. He added that Central Command may not be using its own Arabic or Farsi speakers, but rather contract personnel. “We’re sharing with State and trying to, you know, better our knowledge on how to do it.”
The State-Defense communications approach is also turning to a more sophisticated message, one that moves away from trying to change perceptions of the United States, focusing instead on the self-perceptions of its target audiences. “Our core message must outline an alternative future that is more attractive than the bleak future offered by the terrorists,” said Michael Doran, deputy assistant secretary of defense for support of public diplomacy.
Seems to me State has the right to do what theyre doing. And It might just turn a few opinions. But whether theyll be considered credible when unmasked as agents of the U.S. government is another thing entirely.
– Christian
The NY Times had the same story last September, with more details.
It is a good idea. Bloggers can be replaced if they end up with a reputation that is counter to objective.
It’s the same mentality that had Karen Hughes “working” on what amounted to glorified advertising campaign. It’ll accomplish just as much — nothing.
We like to believe that the problem is that other peoples “don’t understand us”, that we just need to explain ourselves better, or maybe wrap the “explanations” in a slicker, more stylish package. But survey after survey indicates that people all over the world understand us quite well. It’s what we DO that makes us increasingly disliked. Maybe we ought to take a look at that.
That’s all well and good.. but the question is this is going to time well wasted. I think the big question is the ‘terrorist world’ plugged in enough for the internet to be a decisive tool for the terrorists.
Internet Connectivity stats can be found here:
http://www.internetworldstats.com/list2.htm
I don’t know which countries are producing the blogs or considered a threat… I’d like to draw my own conclusion but I don’t have enough information.
I think this is a great idea. The US government needs to do a better job at perception management around the world if it wants to maintain a force presence in all four corners of the earth. Time will tell how effective this is, but it is just common sense to try and defend US policies against the propaganda floating around the blogsphere. This is a modern version of “Air America” in Europe.
PSYOPS and perception management will have a much more prominent role in wars and foreign policy of the future. This is just a small taste of what’s to come. And if the US wants to use everything at its disposal to win this ideological showdown, it’s high time something like this is tried.
Six years after 9/11, and State’s got 3 people doing digital psyops? Three?
If this isn’t disinformation, it’s incompetence.
But I guess if it’s Uncle Sugar, it could be both at the same time.
Isn’t some dozy Muslim gonna run across this blog entry, tell his 40 thieves and then they’ll distrust anything positive about your country on anti-American blogs?
SG;
You must have missed the fact that the readers know who’s posting, and say, “We don’t like your policies but we’re sure glad you’re here talking to us about it.”
Did the author have any idea what “zorch” means when he wrote this article?
First… Let your voice be heard. If we don’t go out and talk about this stuff, try and correct the misinformation (sglover, you should try reading some of these blogs, they have crazy ideas about what is going on here), try and give them ideas about how to make their lives better, more free. Even if they reject them, it’s better they know the ideas, thoughts and modivations than blindly speculate or worst believe what they are told by the Fundies.
Second, We get to hear their voices, and hear what they would express directly to us. This is exactly what we should be doing. More of this and less direct intervention.