US Military -v- Internal blogging & Access to WWW

[Cori]

You cannot imagine the difficulties surrounding that issue as it concerns civilian bloggers, before you even get into the distinctions between military and civilian law. I don't myself buy into the argument that bloggers are de facto journalists, although it is possible that on occasion they may be performing or engaging in a process that is akin to journalism. This has primarily come up as concerns shield laws (do bloggers have the same protections afforded journalists -- to the extent they have them -- when it comes to the right to not reveal sources or give up documents, video tape, etc. to govt. officials.) Here's the problem with that one: if everyone is a potential "journalist," then how does a society enforce some kind of norm that says everyone has an obligation to testify when called upon to do so?

Well, if military members are journalists, what does that do to their obligations to not publish information, footage, photographs, etc? Wouldn't their first amendment protections trump any other obligations?

Don't think so.

Bloggers, it seems to me, are press critics involved in a larger community conversation.

For all sorts of reasons, the larger military benefited from having its members' voices being heard, even when those voices were critical, in part because those voices were sometimes critical, because it was precisely the fact that those voices were sometimes critical that gave them credibility.

[Cori]

One of the best known "portal" bloggers makes an interesting point -- since this is only an Army reg, other services' milbloggers will continue uninterrupted. If the Marines end up getting more attn for what their troops are doing in the combat zones, again?

http://instapundit.com/archives2/004774.php

[Jimbo]

I know where I am working right now, we have had some huge secuirty problems, at levels above FOUO. so realistically, I can't see every blogger getting fired, but who knows. We have had some big OPSEC issues come to light. Hell, go to the warden thread.

[Ender]

I just caught wind of this thread and must admit I am shocked... I want to read the whole thing and check out all of the links before I say anything more but this is the exact opposite of what I would have expected.

Can someone from USMC higher please smooth my ruffled feathers and assure me we aren't going to see a parallel response from the Corps? This kind of crap is an initiative KILLER.

[selil]

Can someone from USMC higher please smooth my ruffled feathers and assure me we aren't going to see a parallel response from the Corps? This kind of crap is an initiative KILLER.

Initiative? Who issued you that?

[Cori]

With respect, the Warden didn't get into the deserved troublehe's in for blogging.

I don't think anyone's suggesting OPSEC not be taken seriously, only that there had to be a less drastic measure available. Allowing all the bloggers free rain carries the risk that someone will make a mistake or do something stupid, but shutting them all down is not cost free either.

Here's a question -- while I understand there are reasons why the military might not want to advertise particular cases, you'd think we'd of heard at least one story explaining this decision.

So -- who's heard at least the bare bones of a story explaining what someone did to get everyone shut down?

[Rob Thornton]

From Zen Pundit:

It is my expectation that such an effect was the primary purpose behind these regs as the international Islamist movement is not going to be inconvenienced in the slightest.

I think this is a large part of our problem - while the enemy is focused on offensive Info Warfare we are focused on more body armor & damage control . While the enemy is focused on finding ways to connect, share, grown, & leverage in its use of communications- we seem to be investing time and energy in truncation, stove piping and compartmentalization.

Hermetically sealing the military off from the world ( which won't succeed anyway) is the sign of siege mentality in the officer corps and a harbinger of decline.

I'm reading "The Starfish & the Spider" - while I recognize we must have some degree of centralized struture, the decentralized nature of our enemy requires we adapt certain levels of decentralization (arguably beyond what is currently doctrinally acceptable) to compete & win. This not only applies to IO but operations in general.

Zen Pundit had also mention OPSEC education, how about one step further and make an IO course available online that discusses how the enemy uses IO and how Soldier bloggers can combat it by reporting, blogging, etc.? I think if we were to empower and encourage we could leverage service members who want to be part of the solution. No, your not going to be able to micro-manage - just issue some guidance - "What not How" and accept that it will be executed in a decentralized manner. Get the word out through the chain of command about an awesome opportunity and start issuing some rewards for effective IO operations by individuals - could be recognition (AAMs, ARCOMs - depends on the effect believed to have on a target audience) - could be monetary. This way you get a three-fer - you get reporting, you get self-policing and you get massive IO by talented individuals relatively cheap that adpats faster then the enemy.

[wm]

So -- who's heard at least the bare bones of a story explaining what someone did to get everyone shut down?

You probably need to be aware that the previous Army Chief was raised as a Spec Ops guy and, as a result, was extremely operations security conscious. He probably also motivated the Vice Chief (unless the Vice was already of a similar mind set, which would not surprise me) to take a similar position. I know that security issues related to eelctronic files, computers, email and the internet has been a big issue to Army leadership since at least late 2003. Based on the new policy and other security regulations), however, I am not at liberty to discuss details in this medium, especially without verifying everyone's need to know.