May 2, 2007

Army To Milbloggers: About Face

The US Army has promulgated a new set of rules for operational security that puts restrictions on the ability of soldiers to write about their experiences in combat theaters. In fact, the change will be so restrictive as to have the practical effect of eliminating active-duty milbloggers, and silencing the voices from the front who have most actively promoted the war effort (via Michelle Malkin):

The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages, without first clearing the content with a superior officer, Wired News has learned. The directive, issued April 19, is the sharpest restriction on troops' online activities since the start of the Iraq war. And it could mean the end of military blogs, observers say.

Military officials have been wrestling for years with how to handle troops who publish blogs. Officers have weighed the need for wartime discretion against the opportunities for the public to personally connect with some of the most effective advocates for the operations in Afghanistan and Iraq -- the troops themselves. The secret-keepers have generally won the argument, and the once-permissive atmosphere has slowly grown more tightly regulated. Soldier-bloggers have dropped offline as a result. ...

"This is the final nail in the coffin for combat blogging," said retired paratrooper Matthew Burden, editor of The Blog of War anthology. "No more military bloggers writing about their experiences in the combat zone. This is the best PR the military has -- it's most honest voice out of the war zone. And it's being silenced."

The Army gets paid to protect operational security. In this war, more than any other, the enemies of our troops use the Internet to their advantage, both in their own communications and to scope out their enemies -- the American military and government. If troops have leaked classified information either deliberately or inadvertently through their on-line communications, this would be a large area of concern to the Pentagon.

However, no one has any evidence that milbloggers have violated Opsec orders in their communications. The one example offered in Wired is an old story about how people noticed a lot of parked cars and an uptick in pizza deliveries to the Pentagon on January 16, 1991, which presaged the imminent activation of Operation Desert Storm. That seems rather picayune, not to mention outdated.

If that's the extent of their concern and the extent of the violations, then they have sacrificed a powerful voice of support for the Army and the mission in favor of an almost-useless silence. The author of the new rules, Major Ray Ceralde, claims that it won't kill milblogging, but the regulations make it so cumbersome that it will be impossible to maintain blogs -- or even e-mail. Here's the relevant section:

g. Consult with their immediate supervisor and their OPSEC Officer for an OPSEC review prior to publishing or posting information in a public forum.

(1) This includes, but is not limited to letters, resumes, articles for publication, electronic mail (e-mail), Web site
postings, web log (blog) postings, discussion in Internet information forums, discussion in Internet message boards or other forms of dissemination or documentation.

(2) Supervisors will advise personnel to ensure that sensitive and critical information is not to be disclosed. Each
unit or organization’s OPSEC Officer will advise supervisors on means to prevent the disclosure of sensitive and
critical information.

In practical terms, a commanding officer would have to approve every blog post, every e-mail, and every forum post before the soldier could complete it. With the prodigious red tape of the military and the other duties of commanding officers, that means it could take days, weeks, or even forever before those requests get addressed. The immediacy of the information will be lost, and so will interest in it.

Milbloggers have provided a vital voice in this war, reporting from vantage points unattainable elsewhere. We have learned about the successes in this war, such as rebuilding efforts and the enthusiasm of Iraqis in neighborhoods protected by American forces, that we do not get in our mainstream media since the embed program ended. Nothing appears ready to replace it except for official Pentagon statements, which carry less weight with the reading public than the soldiers on the front line.

The Army should be concerned about the operational security of the mission -- but without those voices engaging the American public, the mission may be lost here at home.

Addendum: I almost missed the most humorous part of the new rules. Many of the contractors bound by them can't get access to the new Opsec document:

But, while the regulations may apply to a broad swath of people, not everybody affected can actually read them. In a Kafka-esque turn, the guidelines are kept on the military's restricted Army Knowledge Online intranet. Many Army contractors -- and many family members -- don't have access to the site. Even those able to get in are finding their access is blocked to that particular file.

"Even though it is supposedly rewritten to include rules for contractors (i.e., me) I am not allowed to download it," e-mails Perry Jeffries, an Iraq war veteran now working as a contractor to the Armed Services Blood Program.

Does this remind anyone else of Catch-22?

UPDATE: Be sure to read the post and the comments at Blackfive, and also at Mudville Gazette.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/cq082307.cgi/9855

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Army To Milbloggers: About Face:

» The End of Military Blogging? Is the Army Nuts? from Pal2pal

Michell Malkin is carrying a story this morning with some very bad news: Via Malkin via Noah Shachtman: The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages, without first clearing the content with a su...

[Read More]

» The End of Military Blogging? Is the Army Nuts? from Pal2pal

Michell Malkin is carrying a story this morning with some very bad news: Via Malkin via Noah Shachtman: The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages, without first clearing the content with a su...

[Read More]

» MilBloggers: stop or face UCMJ from Cop The Truth
Sometimes I can't figure the U.S. Army out. With all of the negative crap coming out of Iraq and Afghanistan via the MSM, the Army, in its infinite wisdom, has decided to put a stop to military bloggers. Revised Army [Read More]

» Miliblogs Silenced? from Macsmind - Conservative Commentary and Common Sense
Apparently they have according to this wired article: “The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages, without first clearing the content with a superior officer, Wired News has learned. The direct... [Read More]

» Army To Military Bloggers: Shut ‘Em Down. Am I To Blame? from The Gun Toting Liberal™
Citing OPSEC (Operations Security) “problems” as the catalyst for the decision, the U.S. Army has mandated a virtual shut-down of all blogs written by military personnel and their family members despite the fact that there have only been ... [Read More]

» Leashing the Blogs of War? from Dyre Portents
Blogs Chronicle War from Soldiers' Perspectives (major snip) On April 19 the Army released an updated OPSEC policy, Army Regulation 530-1. This policy requires Army personnel to consult with a supervisor and their OPSEC officer before posting info... [Read More]

» No More Milbloggers? from Donklephant
Army is cracking down, even though milbloggers have been historically within the existing rules. From Wired: The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages, without first clearing the content... [Read More]

Comments (15)

Posted by amdilli [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 11:25 AM

My brother is stationed in Afghanistan. The only thing that has made this easier on us is being able to keep in touch with him by email. To receive even just a 'hi' from him on occasions, lets us know that he's ok. I would be devastated if the new rules take that away.

Posted by RBMN [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 11:31 AM

I think the military has a good point. The folks at the bottom can't be the gatekeepers of information. Not because they're sloppy or insensitive, but because they may not know how valuable what they know is.

In WWII, in some cases, Americans knew from intelligence that the Germans wrote off certain types of Allied strikes, because the Germans thought Allied Forces couldn't get through there easily enough. If that's the case, you don't want soldiers posting photos with cliffs or bogs in the background that would tip off the Germans. You can't expect troops at lower levels to even know that it's an issue. And sometimes, commanders are not even free to explain why it's an issue.

Posted by ajacksonian [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 11:35 AM

What really gets me is that the Armed Forces could very well set up their own blogging platform, put in the equivalent of a 'dirty word search' for posts that might have OpSec problems, delay posts by a few hours for a bot to do any major phrase matching and such and then publish it.

Anything flagged gets human review, the soldiers would have a reliable way to express their attitudes and endanger no one, and anything that might hinder security is routed back for re-write/editing by the author. Plus all original posts can be stored in safe keeping until the major conflict is over and there is no OpSec involved.

Probably wouldn't be a great platform, but I am sure one of the software purveyors would love to donate their platform for such use or charge a minimal fee. To the Government, although I do believe that one or two have 'free for non-corporate use' clauses.

Welcome to the 21st century, perhaps it is time the info control part of the Armed Forces move on from the 19th.

Posted by Doc Neaves [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 12:18 PM

ajacksonian...that wouldn't work, because no matter how tight the filtering process is, some would get through. Those in charge have done the math, and realize that a draconian step would be required to insure even an eighty percent success rate in stopping POSSIBLE information breaches (since we never know which bit of info is necessary, we have to stop all of it), they might as well take the not-very-much-more draconian step of stopping all communication altogether. There's considerable legal precedent for them to do this, but probably NONE to back them up on making a pick-and-choose type of filter.

My son-in-law is in Iraq, too. Love to get emails from him. Would hate to find out he gave the enemy something to use against him in one of his emails. But more important than our 'feelings' is security. In World War II, they understood that, even with an enemy that, more or less, played by the rules. These guys don't, and will use anything they can take advantage of to win.

Posted by jiHymas@himivest.com [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 1:12 PM

I confess that I am dumbfounded by the Cap'n's complaints about the security policy.

On the one hand, we are continually being told what a gigantic total war this is; in which unquestioning sycophancy to the CinC is a patriotic duty; in which any sacrifice should be embraced (with the exception of higher taxes to pay for it all, of course, or any other threat to the standard of living).

And on the other hand, there are complaints about restrictions on active-duty soldiers blogging?

Priceless. See this very informative exhibit of WW2 censorship for an example of what happens during a real war.

Posted by Bill Faith [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 2:27 PM

What's the old saying? There's a right way, a wrong way, and a wrong way? I wouldn't normally look to Captain Ed for military analysis, although he's a danged sight smarter than Bend-over-and-smile Harry, but in this case Blackfive and two of his cobloggers have already weighed in with "It's stupid" and I have to go with their judgment. I linked.

Posted by RacerX [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 2:28 PM

No, Captain Ed makes a VERY important point. OPSEC issues aside, Milblogging has been perhaps THE most effective tool in getting actual news out of Iraq and Afghanistan to the public -- what's happening, progress made, etc. The Iraq War is as much a propaganda war as anything else, with those who want to retreat spinning defeatism on a daily basis. Without Milblogging it's back to the MSM as the primary filter of news -- meaning we will ONLY get negative news, undermining the ability of people like Captain Ed, Malkin, or even you and I for that matter, to counter the negative spin of the MSM with real information from our men and women in the field -- and thus cede the War of Words to the MoveOn.orgs of the world.

ajacksonian's suggestion is a great one that the US military would do wewll to accept. The media isn't going to carry their message, but done properly the troops can speak directly to the American public.

Posted by Bill Faith [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 2:42 PM

What's the old saying? There's a right way, a wrong way, and a wrong way? I wouldn't normally look to Captain Ed for military analysis, although he's a danged sight smarter than Bend-over-and-smile Harry, but in this case Blackfive and two of his cobloggers have already weighed in with "It's stupid" and I have to go with their judgment. I linked.

Posted by Bill Faith [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 2:51 PM

What's the old saying? There's a right way, a wrong way, and a wrong way? I wouldn't normally look to Captain Ed for military analysis, although he's a danged sight smarter than Bend-over-and-smile Harry, but in this case Blackfive and two of his cobloggers have already weighed in with "It's stupid" and I have to go with their judgment. I linked.

Posted by Eric E. Coe [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 4:34 PM

Not a military guy, but based on other reading I think the saying was "A right way, a wrong way, and the Army way." or something like that...

Posted by Ray [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 7:49 PM

RacerX is right on target. a European military blog called EUReferendum is currently discussing exactly the same problem. They note that the British newspaper articles concerning the recent operations in Afghanistan are negative and pessimistic. The article published on the same action in Al Jazeera was far more positive for the coalition.

The problem is that good news is not published by the MSM. The MSM prefers showing body bags and caskets. If that is all that the public sees, soon they will turn the majority into anti-war voters.

It is now up to the blogging community to bring the truth and good news to people when it happens. Restricting the blogging community from military news is a serious mistake.

Posted by Bill Faith [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 9:51 PM

Yes, Eric, you're memory is correct. I was trying to be punny.

Posted by iraqwarwrong [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 10:48 PM

Wow. So the Army's afrad the Troops will spill the bean's about how there over there on Arab Land killing ARab's. Um earth to Army- we already know that.

Posted by SwabJockey05 [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 3, 2007 11:37 AM

I'm surprised they didn't stop this a long time ago....basic security has been compromised.

As for Ed saying "-- but without those voices engaging the American public, the mission may be lost here at home. "

Sorry, but it's not up to the Dog Face or Marine in the field to "engage the public". They are supposed to be killing lunatics. The elected "leaders" are supposed to be engaging the public on the "why" and "cost benefit analysis" of the killing.

Posted by Cassandra [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 3, 2007 5:58 PM

So the Army's afrad the Troops will spill the bean's about how there over there on Arab Land killing ARab's.

No, IWR.

The Army's afraid with a bunch of 18-22 year olds living among the Iraqis 24/7 instead of sleeping behind the wire now, maybe.... just maybe... it's not the smartest thing on earth to blog about operational details.

But of course officers are all idiots to think of things like that. We'll leave the really *smart* stuff up to bloggers. Because after all, your right to read gritty war stories right now outweighs paltry considerations like their coming home with both legs.