Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 80

Thread: COIN & The Media (catch all)

  1. #21
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lorton, VA
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Cookie View Post
    ...So I’m curious, whether you think I’m completely off base. Is the media, particularly Western media, an accepted part of the COIN at all levels or is it seen as an opponent in an us-versus-them conflict?
    Of course the media is a part of COIN but there has to be a balance. The US Military is not allowed to "lie" to the media, I'll be gosh-darned if I know what law prevents this, but Public Affairs officers are loathe to even stretch the truth. Their overriding concern is always to be perceived as truth-tellers. When Information Operations operators and planners work with PA folks there used to be a lot of animosity and mistrust, but this appears to no longer be the case. As a matter of fact in Afghanistan it is codified that they work together and on almost all staffs there is cooperation.

    But, there are two primary parts of Information Operations that make it difficult for PA and IO to work together, sometimes to the detriment of PA. Psychological Operations and Military Deception. The perception that PSYOP lies, while thy usually emphasize facts supporting their point, implies to some in the media that working with PSYOP means you might be not telling the truth (a misperception). Military Deception, by its very nature, either hides the truth in plain sight or absolutely obscures our true intentions, this could be perceived as outright lying. Thus there is a perception that anyone working in IO may or may not be telling the truth. This has also seemed to lead a misperception by some media members that the military is always 'not telling the truth'.

    Another problem is that bad news sells. I can walk the media through countless shows of positive progress but the story that will sell deals with tragedy, corruption, illegal activities or another sort of a negative story. I've seen media folks not paying attention at demonstrations and slip away to find a "Joe Tentpeg" and ask their story, hoping to find a scoop. I can't fault them for this, not personally, but professionally it hurts.

    Another problem is presenting the story. Dead babies worked great in Lebanon in 2006, showing the Israelis to be brutal, cruel, heartless - terrific negative press. The 2008/2009 Israeli-Hamas war saw Israel controlling media access to the battlespace and maximizing a myriad of media to portray their story, but the media was hobbled and spoon fed some stories.

    How does this relate to COIN? Embedded media works, but it has inherent risk. Press releases are boring, press conferences are useful because it is more human, but empowering the press allows them to roam and see the truth for themselves. Issuing a list of 'must sees' to the media is an idea that occasionally works, but generating interest outside what appears to be official channels will draw media reporting - and this is a true challenge.

    Cultural sensitivity is another really important issue. The military is beginning to understand that cultural differences create problems and is aggressively solving the problem when it occurs. But the media has the same problems, especially if they are foreigners... highlighting the difference between two very disparate cultures shows how well the situation is being addressed when successes do occur.

    This is all difficult but must be done...
    Joel
    Alexandria, VA

  2. #22
    Council Member Spud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canberra, ACT, Australia
    Posts
    122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
    Tales of misquotes and out of context statements drive the troops to avoid the media. There are exceptions and a few have told me of specific reporters -- also few -- that were always welcome.

    A recurring complaint, minor and even petty to some but serious to those making it, is that the media is pretty ignorant about things military. Improper terminology, wrong names and a host of minor misunderstood things appear in print and foster the perception that many in the media don't know much and do not care that they don't know much. That to some is an indicator of low regard and no one likes to believe they are held in low regard.
    Over the past few years my experience with the lads has led me to believe that the disagreement/mistrust/disgust between our soldiers and journos has been based on the perception of professionalism. The digs are hyper-critical. They spend their lives training and perfecting their skills and operate in an environment where everyone is focussed on excellence. When mistakes occur we immediately apply critical thought processes and analyse the mistakes to see what we can learn from them so that it doesn't happen again. The organisation is focussed on excellence from the individual level up. Now picture a journo ... he/she writes well but in no way is a SME in the military field. They focus on their next deadline rather than the longer term and through their processes essentially wipe the slate clean each time an article is published. The media game is focussed on the next 24 hours so much that the past is simply that ... the past. Journo's essentially start each working day fresh with no real organisational consequence for what happened the day before (unless they commit a shocker). In essence you have two organisations that are diametrically opposed in their work ethic/value set and the consequences of those factors are all too real to one group while they are esoteric to the other.

    I think Professor Phil Taylor sums it up quite well in one slide -- "The Clash of Cultures"

    Importantly this doesn't mean we can't work together ... we spend a fair bit of time educating our digs about these differing values so that we can build better relationships. Breaking the parochial military view of everyone else on the battlefield is key and as soldiers get more exposure, experience and education they are not as quick to jump to values-based decisions.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  3. #23
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default All true. We need to spend more time educating our

    Troops than we now do. It would also help if DoD could develop a concise Pamphlet to assist in the education of the media types so they can use the terminology a little more accurately and understand to whom they were talking. No easy fixes on this one, regrettably...

  4. #24
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    Dog eat cat?

  5. #25
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default I had a couple that would...

    That was a few years ago. Today's Dogs are also kinder and gentler and just harass the Cats to distraction, they make no attempt to kill 'em.

    I think that bullet on the slide alludes to the desire to become a really big name no matter what the cost to competitors or even one's own institution or organization (or, apparently from today's world, ones own ethics). Much as the 'dog eat dog' implies that seniority is not only not respected, it is to one's credit to trump a nominal senior or elder of the pack. It's the Columbia University School of Journalism's apparent answer to everything -- "me, me, me..."

  6. #26
    Small Wars Journal SWJED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Largo, Florida
    Posts
    3,989

    Default Discussion now carried over to Foreign Policy...

    ... in our SWJ column This Week at War by Robert Haddick (Westhawk).

    The military and the media - two scorpions in a bottle?

    An anonymous journalist who covers the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ventured onto the Small Wars Journal discussion board to ask the question, "How well have we incorporated the media into COIN [counter-insurgency] efforts?" The anonymous journalist went on:

    I'm intrigued at how the media, especially our own Western media, seems to be treated differently than other players in the COIN fight. Many who are adept at co-opting former enemy fighters into their COIN strategy are quick to malign, insult or disparage media organizations who, like it or not, will be the ones telling the story to the local populace or those back home.

    The media is clearly a part of COIN strategy at higher levels, but for some reason this view does not seem to have trickled down to lower levels to the extent that other COIN strategies have. I've heard many soldiers in Iraq tell reporters that they don't like the media in general or the reporter's paper in particular. I've never heard soldiers tell Iraqis that they just don't like that person's neighborhood, party or sect - even if they might feel that way privately. I think you can see this on these very boards: Many complaints about the media, very few complaints about the local populace or their organizations. This seems counterproductive.

    This reporter's reasonable question was met with some impassioned responses from the Small Wars Council's combat veterans. The soldiers expressed their frustration with what they saw as the media's preconceived conclusions and propensity for distortion. One soldier noted the differences he personally witnessed in the media's behavior covering Bosnia (supportive of the policy) compared to Afghanistan and Iraq (not supportive).

    The tempestuous relationship between the military and the media is both ancient and enduring. But it is also an issue that the U.S. military, and especially the Army, is now addressing in a thorough manner. Lt. Gen. William Caldwell, the commander of the Army's Combined Arms Center (a sprawling system of schools and training programs), has had his staff study the issue and prepare "how-to" manuals on media relations, written for soldiers in the field (see here and here). Chapter titles include such topics as, "Arab Media Interviews and the American Commander," "Breaking Through the National Media Filter," and "The Al-Qaeda Media Machine."

    It remains to be seen how long it will take General Caldwell's efforts to reach down to the captains and sergeants now on patrol in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.

  7. #27
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    No commenting feature at the FP blog? Too bad. I'd be interested to see what perceptions are among the non-military readers of that site.

  8. #28
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Well as one of only two full-time defence analysts employed by a UK based news organisation during both A'Stan 01 and Iraq 03, I have lectured a far deal to military audiences on this. I'll paraphrase my main points,

    a.) Engaging with the media comes at great risk of loss and very little of gain.
    b.) The media can and does invent stories with little chance of being challenged. They military cannot do the same.
    c.) In order to compete with the media, you need to make "information warfare," into "physical warfare." Physical restrictions are both legal, and workable.
    d.) Most US and UK military Media organisation are not fit for purpose, and those advising them mostly preach a doctrine beneficial to the media and not the military.

    If media are part of a COIN effort, then they need to be "under command." If not "under command," they are a high risk liability.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  9. #29
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default

    I might add that the very topic of how well have we incorporated the media into COIN efforts plays about as well in the journalistic community as how well do we incorporate the military into whistle-blowing and critical investigative reporting would in the military....
    They mostly come at night. Mostly.


  10. #30
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex Brynen View Post
    I might add that the very topic of how well have we incorporated the media into COIN efforts plays about as well in the journalistic community as how well do we incorporate the military into whistle-blowing and critical investigative reporting would in the military....
    Could not have said it better!! Exactly!
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  11. #31
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default The only achievable accomodation between the media and the military

    is in competence. The media is not ever going to be really competent due to commercial pressure. That's life...

    The media (and the politicians) will look for stories, bad news sells (and garners votes. Maybe...). The Armed Forces can be more competent than they now are by a fair degree without a great deal of effort and at small cost. Such competence will attract far less adverse media (and political) attention and that will likely offset the slight cost increase.

  12. #32
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default much as I always try to agree with Ken..

    ...I don't think the media is quite as incompetent as he does.

    Certainly, there are a great number of poor media outlets, lazy reporters, and a lot of playing to the entertainment demands of the market rather than informing and analyzing. Those sorts of weaknesses apply in any industry or organization.

    That having been said, as someone who works with both open source/media information (in my usual academic capacity) and top-end classified stuff (when sometimes wearing an intel analysis hat), I have to say that not only is the former sometimes/often more nuanced and informative than the latter, but that above and beyond this 1) the latter would often make little no sense without the broader contextualization offered by the former, and 2) the fact that so damn much of value now appears open source allows collection to be focused on confirming OS information, or examining the known (and potential) unknown unknowns.

    Of course, it depends on what particular issues you're working on. I do political assessment. If, on the other hand, I wanted detailed analysis of military deployments or combat operations, I wouldn't look to the media for particularly informed or nuanced material.
    They mostly come at night. Mostly.


  13. #33
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Well, when you don't, I tend to relook my position -- or statement...

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex Brynen View Post
    ...I don't think the media is quite as incompetent as he does.
    (He probably doesn't either but he does have fun slinging mud at them...)
    That having been said, as someone who works with both open source/media information ... and top-end classified stuff... I have to say that not only is the former sometimes/often more nuanced and informative than the latter...
    Agreed
    If, on the other hand, I wanted detailed analysis of military deployments or combat operations, I wouldn't look to the media for particularly informed or nuanced material.
    True -- and, the generic reason for my less than nuanced shotgun blasts. That's where their ignorance and thus inadvertant incompetence show..

    Thus my comments and my belief that we have a problem of almost mutually repellent objects that can have a non problematic relationship only if one object changes; it is IMO to the advantage of the military for them to change as insistence on media change is unlikely to be heeded.

    There is no news in jobs well done; dog bites man is not a story...

  14. #34
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lorton, VA
    Posts
    13

    Default

    In my current position I'm working with the media more every day and I have found most of the Washington DC based Journalists show one of two faces: honest and enthusiastic and/or jaded and cynical. I find it fascinating when a journalist asks for a teleconference number to phone in rather than showing up in person, in my personal opinion they miss the opportunity to see faces and pursue follow up questions or introduce themselves to a good source...

    I've also had the rare opportunity to work with real hard-core professionals who have done their homework ahead of time, work both sides of an issue, ask probing questions that elicit a lengthy response, and that recognize the nuances which can mean life or death for the guys on the ground. These folks are a genuine pleasure to work with, even though they sometimes drag my sorry butt through the mud with their search for the truth...
    Joel
    Alexandria, VA

  15. #35
    Council Member J Wolfsberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    806

    Default

    I have to disagree with you, Ken. The media is very competent. The real question is: competent at what? That is the central issue, and I think it gets at the role the media has played in our current COIN operations. The key points, IMHO, are:

    1. Advocacy journalism. The US is an evil empire, with an army composed of ignorant economic losers, led by a bumbler from Texas, and after they return to civilian life they either kill themselves or go on killing sprees. Does all of that sound familiar? Every single bit is a narrative from the NYT, CBS, MSNBC, ... just about all of the national media. I realize for the journalists and editors it's nothing personal, but if you're on the receiving end of this it's personal as hell. Of course the military doesn't like the people who are seen as slandering them.

    2. The media is involved in COIN - for the other side. I don't think it's so much that they want the jihadis to win, as that they want the US to lose. For evidence, look at Reuters refusing to call terrorists "terrorists." The NYT publishing anything that comes along that casts the US in a bad light. I could go on for pages. The point is, if the media is seen as acting in a way that benefits the other side, they can't be surprised when the people on our side treat them as adversaries - they are.

    3. Using soldiers as pawns to advance their narrative. Haditha. Enough said?

    I appreciate that the media should have a role. But I come from a period in time when the ideal of that role was to present all the facts and let people decide. The media of today sees itself as an active participant in affairs, one with special privileges, having no accountability to anyone, and acts accordingly.
    Last edited by J Wolfsberger; 02-09-2009 at 04:43 PM.
    John Wolfsberger, Jr.

    An unruffled person with some useful skills.

  16. #36
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default I bow to your superior wisdom.

    Quote Originally Posted by J Wolfsberger View Post
    I have to disagree with you, Ken. The media is very competent. The real question is: competent at what...

    1. Advocacy journalism....

    2. The media is involved in COIN - for the other side...

    3. Using soldiers as pawns to advance their narrative. Haditha. Enough said?

    I appreciate that the media should have a role. But I come from a period in time when the ideal of that role was to present all the facts and let people decide. The media of today sees itself as an active participant in affairs, one with special privileges, having no accountability to anyone, and acts accordingly.
    Not only do I bow but I will also present corroborative evidence of your brilliance:

    LINK.

    With an attitude like that, who needs enemies. An award for advocacy journalism, COIN involvement and the tossing of a Pawn or two on the fire...

    That causes me to restate something I said earlier: "...it is IMO to the advantage of the military for them to change as insistence on media change is unlikely to be heeded."

    Sad. Really.

  17. #37
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    While reading that link, I had to remind myself, several times, that it was being written by a journalist, rather than someone in the comment section of a far-left blog. Holy crap.

    He could have summed it up in one sentence rather than a lengthy article:

    Shooting you in the back was easy and enjoyable until you so rudely moved and caused me the inconvenience of having to reacquire you in my sights.

  18. #38
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
    While reading that link, I had to remind myself, several times, that it was being written by a journalist, rather than someone in the comment section of a far-left blog. Holy crap.

    He could have summed it up in one sentence rather than a lengthy article:

    Shooting you in the back was easy and enjoyable until you so rudely moved and caused me the inconvenience of having to reacquire you in my sights.
    The article reports on a journalist/editor/CEO expressing his personal views to an audience of fellow journalists/students where it would be fully appropriate for him to express his personal opinions. I didn't find anything in it that was especially objectionable—I find the references to al-Qa'ida a bit too silly and rhetorical for my tastes, but people tend to get rhetorical when delivering rhetoric.

    When journalists stop advocating for first amendment rights/freedom of speech/etc is when one really needs to worry. If people find it odd that journalists think they should be free to to their jobs, then there is even mutual misunderstanding than I first thought!
    They mostly come at night. Mostly.


  19. #39
    Council Member Ron Humphrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,099

    Question While I agree with you

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex Brynen View Post
    The article reports on a journalist/editor/CEO expressing his personal views to an audience of fellow journalists/students where it would be fully appropriate for him to express his personal opinions. I didn't find anything in it that was especially objectionable—I find the references to al-Qa'ida a bit too silly and rhetorical for my tastes, but people tend to get rhetorical when delivering rhetoric.

    When journalists stop advocating for first amendment rights/freedom of speech/etc is when one really needs to worry. If people find it odd that journalists think they should be free to to their jobs, then there is even mutual misunderstanding than I first thought!

    This part somewhat confounds me
    said the news industry must immediately negotiate a new set of rules for covering war because "we are the only force out there to keep the government in check and to hold it accountable."
    Might just be me but i coulda sworn thats what having three separate but equal branches was all about


    Exactly how should organizations such as the military who spend probably a good 30+% of their resources ensuring they keep themselves in check recieve such statements as this. Especially from those who help run organizations who not only in perception but in known highly visible reality tend to spend 85% of their time and efforts looking for whats wrong with others yet should anything be askance on their homefront will quickly turn all 100% toward CYA rather than owning up to it.


    If people find it odd that journalists think they should be free to to their jobs, then there is even mutual misunderstanding than I first thought!
    Perhaps theres something there

    maybe definition of what exactly their job is??
    Last edited by Ron Humphrey; 02-09-2009 at 08:24 PM. Reason: add
    Any man can destroy that which is around him, The rare man is he who can find beauty even in the darkest hours

    Cogitationis poenam nemo patitur

  20. #40
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default This is true:

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex Brynen View Post
    ...I find the references to al-Qa'ida a bit too silly and rhetorical for my tastes, but people tend to get rhetorical when delivering rhetoric.
    Said another way, actors play to their audiences. And this guy is an actor; he's a product of the USA Today / Gannet empire. Al Neuharth taught those folks all they know -- and 'just the facts' was not a part of his money grubbing equation. His, Neuharth's. autobiography is well named (LINK)....

    Couple of quotes from the article I linked :

    """Much like in Vietnam, "civilian policymakers and soldiers alike have cracked down on independent reporting from the battlefield" when the news has been unflattering, Curley said. "Top commanders have told me that if I stood and the AP stood by its journalistic principles, the AP and I would be ruined."
    . . .
    "...He declined in an interview to say who said AP could be "ruined" for sticking to its principles, but "I knew that they were angry.""
    "

    I suggest he declined in an interview to say who said AP could be ruined because that didn't happen. The First Amendment gives him the right to give names. Professional ethics and any kind of moral grounding -- if they were possessed -- would require him to give names. BS artist got caught -- by his own folks...

    This too:

    """His remarks came a day after an AP investigation disclosed that the Pentagon is spending at least $4.7 billion this year on "influence operations" and has more than 27,000 employees devoted to such activities. At the same time, Curley said, the military has grown more aggressive in withholding information and hindering reporters."""

    Innuendo. I strongly question the numbers that are quoted -- if they mean the entire DoD information operation to include the Public Affairs folks, probably -- but pure info operations. No way.
    When journalists stop advocating for first amendment rights/freedom of speech/etc is when one really needs to worry. If people find it odd that journalists think they should be free to to their jobs, then there is even mutual misunderstanding than I first thought!
    it isn't a mutual misunderstanding Rex, it IS a deep and abiding antipathy. Earned by both sides, unquestionably. However in my observation, the media precipitated it and I was present in Viet Nam when that highly regrettable downward spiral started.

    The bad thing is that the public whom both sides support and need suffers due to that disconnect.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-21-2009, 03:00 PM
  2. The Al-Qaeda Media Nexus
    By Jedburgh in forum Media, Information & Cyber Warriors
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-15-2008, 10:59 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •