What is our Message

[marct]

Hi Ender,

I enjoy your posts very much as well: they are really helping me to grok exactly how people are viewing "the media".

I think that is an excellent distinction and I must admit that my mind was solely focused on what you defined as "broadcast media" when I typed that post.

Honestly, the more I see and the more carefully I read many of the posts here, the more convinced I am that military institutions are "stuck' in the broadcast mindset. Maybe it's just the upper echelons, but I was watching a 60 Minutes segment on CENTCOM's net team and I just couldn't believe my eyes and ears. I found it truly hard to comprehend that it was not being viewed as a battlespace. Then again, I've been involved in the net and online communities for over 20 years (pre-WWW), so I know I'm biased .

In relation to the broadcast media and the $64,000 question it is not that they are perceived as "neutral" but as being the real enemy. I know a number of Marines who would feel much safer having to escort insurgents on a patrol than they would a reporter. The image is that no single entity has done more damage to the US military that the US media and it is very difficult to shake hands and say let's play nice this time.

Hmmmm, it's worse than I thought, then. Do you know if anyone has actually studied this (i.e. interviews, focus groups, etc.)? If someone has, I wold really like to look at their data. If they haven't, I would like to set up a research project to do so. I know I'm showing my academic side, here, but I thin that this is a really important issue!

By highlighting the ambivalence of Joe I hope I have not painted him in an overly harsh or idiotic manner.

Not at all! Any time there is a reaction this strong, there is an underlying reason (or reasons) for that reaction. Having such a reaction just means that Joe is human and, in all probability, frustrated as snot about something. I'd like to find out exactly what he is frustrated about so that the causes can be addressed.

While some may be very black and white the majority do see (some of) the finer distinctions. I think today's enlisted ranks are probably the most educated, most interactive and most technologically savvy force we have ever had. It would be too easy to paint everyone under E-5 as being ignorant and ignore the very real and very justified fears they possess of the embeds. Our troops have very little faith in the media in every single form it assumes and they have good cause.

Again, I agree. Let e point out that most webheads also think the broadcast media is a crock as well and have little or no patience with them.

For my first deployment to Iraq we took the USS Bataan over and something about having a month or so on ship helped us not just to prepare for war but to also prepare us for peace on the way back. My second deployment was between Sep 04 and Apr 05ish and we flew both ways. Literally one day I was on a combat patrol in Anbar and the very next I was flying home. I mention this because after the second deployment, after we got home and turned on the television and got on the net we thought we had lost "the war" overnight. The image being beamed onto tv screens and laptops ran completely contrary to what we KNEW in Iraq The perception is not that the media is an equal opportunity hunter for blood but that they are blatantly biased and enslaved to the fickle whims of an ignorant population who do not want the truth.

Oh, Gods what I could do with such a quote!!!!!! Sorry, I've spent most of my academic career looking at the effective use of rituals, symbols and communications systems in changing perception, and your story about the ship time just tagged off every one of those models!

Let's talk about your last comment for a minute:

The perception is not that the media is an equal opportunity hunter for blood but that they are blatantly biased and enslaved to the fickle whims of an ignorant population who do not want the truth.

That's a pretty harsh judgement, and I'd really like to know how widespread it is and what, if any, exceptions are made. I'm not saying that it is inaccurate, though .

In regards to the interactive media I again have to say this is an angle I was not considering when I wrote and is the subject of much excitement for younger Americans. My poli sci classes are charged with 20 somethings who BELIEVE they can make a difference on the next election and they are right. It is no coincidence that YouTube is one of the hottest things going for young Americans and as long as this can be harnessed in a productive, positive manner there is nothing Washington, New York or London can do about the NCO's with a video recorder strapped to their helmet. If we were in effect allowed to be, (who is going to stop us right?) our own reporters we would be far more effective in getting our message out.

Which is, to my mind, a much better option than allowing the broadcast media to do it . I really think that this would be a much better option all around: it bypasses he broadcast media, it likes dispersed communities together, and it is something that can only be done well by the grassroots. In effect, we would be creating the cyber-strategic corporal.

What can not happen with the interactive media and the troops is exactly what is happening though. For every fluffy, pink, Downy fresh video out there showing troops surrounded by Iraqi youth are five more "Moto" movies that depict every hit, raid, mission, explosion, body part and horrible experience they witnessed. Now I love a good moto video as much as the next Marine but 99 times out of 100 it would be perceived as extremely offensive by even moderates here and in Iraq. This splinter of the interactive revolution is in effect our answer for, or the catalyst for all of the home movies being put out by the "insurgency" over there.

I think there is a place for these types of video clips, but it would probably be best to restrict it to a highly limited segment: "What has AQI done for you lately" and show the aftermath of the last car bomb.

Someone mentioned here on SWC, in effect that our troops more often than not don't need to be told what to do as much as they need to hear what not to do. This is a key component to enlisted psychology and to avoiding your Abu Gharaibs and the like. We have No No lists already but for every offense that is not clearly laid out on the list there is an opening for the Joe to push the boundaries. I would put "No video taping of casualties for personal purposes" at the top of my list as I personally feel the public viewing of their (very guilty) brothers and uncles being killed by us has done as much damage as Abu G. and the like. Those caught breaking the rules should have their "guts stomped in" by nearest NCO or SNCO and expect to have their ass in a permanent sling until they can be proved as trustworthy.

Agreed. the use of shaming in pastoralist cultures is tricky - you have to separate out the effect of shame on the individual and shame on the family. For example, gratuitously showing "... their (very guilty) brothers and uncles being killed..." insults the entire family and the clan. Clan honour is invoked and calls for blood vengeance. On the other hand, if someone has publicly abjured, say, IED making/planting and taken an oath to that effect and then they are caught, well, that also requires blood vengeance - against hem for bringing dishonour to their family and clan. In that case only, such a video might be worthwhile with the support of their family and clan.

If the content of the videos could be trusted I dont see why we couldn't send every platoon out with a couple camcorders... let them film all they want and then have a small unit whose purpose is to edit all of the material that is sensitive or boring and put it together in a hot format... their goal? Create two products, one for us back here and one for them over there. The Iraqis love to see pictures of themselves and their children and if we went around handing out Arabic dvd's of every soccer game, luncheon and social interaction we had with them over a period of X number of months it would go a long long way to personalizing the message. A thought.

Good idea, although I would also suggest that they be integrated into a glocal web site.

Marc