"War on Film"

[marct]

Hi Wilf,

I will read with interest, but I might further clarify my basic premise by saying, the Military needs to stay away from the media.

Hmmm. My problem with this is that I consider it to be impossible in the current information / civic environment. What the military does will be reported, so the media needs to be given a context in which that action is embedded. The reasoning for this is that, in the absence of a given context, the media will create their own context. I would also point out that this refers to the Mainstream Media (MSM) and not the "New Media" (e.g. bloggers etc., - Frontier 6 should wade in on this one).

If by IO we mean leaflet drops, PA broadcasts and good old "PysOps" stuff, then OK. You are merely spreading a message, to better enable your operational and tactical aims. "Don't eat yellow snow, etc" Fine! No problem.

I would certainly consider that to be part of IO; just not the whole. Context, context, context... as a friend of mine in Mass Communications keeps mumbling. "Context" is a battlespace and one that, IMO, is often forgotten. Why did those nasty AF types bomb a wedding party in Afghanistan? A pre-emptive media, context-strike would have set that up before hand. It was still a blunder (amongst other, less printable, terms), but some of the effects of (inevitably) poor targeting operations in COIN can be countered by pre-emptive media context strikes. That, IMO, is also one of the roles of IO; establishing the context in which operations take place.

The second you start trying to use CNN, FOX, SKY or BBC to be part of that process, you've just rubbed up the Genie!

Maybe, but CNN et alii are part of the battlespace and denying that is analogous to arguing that infantry shouldn't think about what's in the air because that "ain't my department".