Quote Originally Posted by Rex Brynen View Post
My concern about too much outsourcing of OSINT analysis stems from the observation that it is sometimes access to the high end classified material that shapes the relevance of OSINT, and those without access to this aren't always in a good position to understand the significance of what they are seeing in the OSINT material. I must admit, I always like to see data as raw as possible, to determine that the analytical conclusions drawn by others are the same ones that I would also draw.
--- In the private sector, this is a given. Evidence is sourced, and anyone who cares to can examine the original source. It's only in the IC that source data is closely guarded rather than shared. It's a good example of one of many flaws in the present system.

I'm also worried about a byproduct of too much OSINT outsourcing being the implicit development of a division of labour--"you do the OSINT, we'll do the COMINT/HUMINT/etc"--which runs counter to the fundamental need for analysts to use the full spectrum of material.
But the current system IS a division of labor. There are MASINT analysts, SIGINT analysts, IMINT analysts, etc., who like the fact that they're specialists and look down their noses at All-Source analysts as nothing more than writers. There's a MITRE study that explores this and recommends some changes be made, but as far as I know, those changes haven't happened yet, and they may never happen at all. Additonally, there are specialist agencies: NRO, NSA, NGA that only focus on certain types of INT collection and analysis.