Don't Get Caught!, or How US Navy Capt. Owen Honors Learned About Filmmaking

[M.L.]

The big story of the week is the relief from command of Navy Captain Owen Honors for videos which he evidently wrote, produced, directed, and starred in from 2006-2007 while serving as the Executive Officer of the USS Enterprise. Apparently, Captain Honors did not heed the lessons to be learned from either George Lucas or Kevin Costner – when you try to do too much yourself in showbiz, it always comes back to haunt you.





This episode is bound to conjure up painful organizational memories for the US Navy of the Tailhook Scandal, and set off a similar debate about professionalism in the US military. Already there is an article in Christian Science Monitor in which the headline asks the question, “Do lewd videos point to deeper problem for military?” The article answers its own question, in a manner of speaking. The article quotes Kaye Whitley, director of the Pentagon’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office, as stating, “It’s a leadership issue.” Well, Kaye, in reality its a bit deeper than that.

It is a cultural issue, which is a reflection of leadership. According to CS Monitor, senior leaders in the Navy knew about these videos long before they became public, yet are only now taking action. It’s a leadership issue alright. But its not Captain Honors’ leadership issue (for him it is a professionalism/ethical issue). No, it is a leadership issue for all the leaders who knew about this, yet were perfectly happy to promote Honors up the chain because he got results. That is, until it became public. Now, those same leaders are perfectly happy to flame Honors for his actions, but only because now they are embarrassing the Navy.

You can’t tell me this is the first time Honors did this, either. Certainly there have been other incidents, which Honors’ leaders were happy to overlook, most likely because Honors was a result-getter. Regardless of all the talk in the military about integrity, professionalism, etc., results-getters and mission-accomplishers get away with a lot because senior leaders are willing to overlook “little” incidents like this – that is, until they become big incidents. The sin isn’t doing something unprofessional – the sin is only getting caught.

Its a leadership issue alright. Every single leader who looked the other way and allowed Honors to come up through the ranks unimpeded is to blame. Yet, mark my words – aside from the officer who was the Captain of the Enterprise at the time the videos were shown – NO OTHER SENIOR LEADER WILL BE PUNISHED. Sadly, that is the way these things work.

[Fuchs]

On the other hand you don't want your armed service to crackdown on every non-conformality to rules.

We all know that work to rule is a form of strike, not a recipe for an effective organization.

[Brihard]

I get where the guy was coming form. A lot of the cookie cutter training material we receive or have to deliver, frankly, sucks. Keeping a bunch of soldiers engaged in stuff that's more likely to make them nod off is a challenge. I imagine it's the same in the U.S. armed forces. He was trying, in good faith I believe, to make the material interesting enough that the troops would listen.

With that said, he still screwed up- good as his intentions were, his judgement sucked.

Whether we like it or not we're forced to operate as armed forces that at least to a certain extent reflect the values of the societies we served. The way these videos come across easily conveys an abuse of his authority as XO, getting his sailors to perform this stuff. He also broke the cardinal rule of screwing around as a troop- never commit to video anything you wouldn't bring home to show the family. Amongst peers it wouldn't have been a big deal, but he's the XO; the right hand of God on a naval vessel, and he has to not just set the example of what he expects from his troops, but exemplify it. In this case it's gone farther to that, and he's brought his unit and his service into disrepute. His career's sunk; he's been yanked from command. Hopefully they'll still find a useful spot for him in the navy, but that said I don't think there's any shortage of good naval aviators waiting to fill the vacancy this will leave. It's an unfortunate but necessary instance of having to use someone's mistake to reaffirm certain basic lines in the sand and to deter others from potentially screwing up worse in future.

Like I tell my guys- everything you do in your professional capacity, subject it to the YouTube test. If you wouldn't want it on YouTube with your name on it, you need to at least give it a sober second thought. It might still be a good idea and necessary, but public perception counts these days. There'd better be a damned compelling reason to do something that will not go over well when it gets out.

[Ken White]

Fuchs and Brihard that is...

How some can decry 'risk aversion' and 'group think' as well as complain of excessive demands for conformity and stultifying superiors in the Armed Forces and then castigate anyone who dares to be a bit different is mind boggling.

Many former crew members have defended the videos as have some teaching merit. As Brihard says, a LOT of training material sucks -- he's obviously a master of understatement -- and as many know, leadership is half showmanship.

My guess is the Navy has just relieved a potentially great combat commander for little reason. Were some people upset? Sure. Justifiably? Equally sure, based on their perspective. Others -- apparently many more others -- were not upset. No way to please everyone, never has been or will be.

This is all much ado about excessive political correctness and most of that ado misses the point that war, combat and the folks who engage in those things are about as politically incorrect as one can be. Yes, "result-getters" get some slack and there are many historical and good reasons for that.

Change that (more than we already have, which is a great deal...) and there will be a cost...

[Rick Bennett]

One of the quotes about rationale for these types of films was to relieve the stress of the extended deployment, and I would gather from the sympathy it garners in the civilian press there are folks who say that the rest of the world just doesn't understand. However, I would ask the purveyors of the film if they have experienced the stress of the recruiter in the living room of middle America?
I would like to think the last ever deployment of a USN CVBG will be a successful one but I would shudder to think that the price of a successful USN CVBG deployment is that is would be the last one ever.

[Pete]

During the early 1970s the U.S. Army toned down the content its preventive maintenance comic book-style periodical PS Magazine in response to criticism from the feminist community. Connie Rodd was given smaller breasts and much of the innuendo was deleted.

[Ken White]

...However, I would ask the purveyors of the film if they have experienced the stress of the recruiter in the living room of middle America?

middle America is several orders of magnitude less concerned by this than are some on the coasts.

As for Recruiting, bad taste videos aren't nearly as deleterious as are mediocre leaders...