You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: WoT
El Lay Times - Rumsfeld OpEd: War in the Information Age
2006-02-23
In a 24/7 world, the U.S. isn't keeping up with its enemies in the communication battle.
Our nation is engaged in what promises to be a long struggle in the global war on terror. In this war, some of the most critical battles may not be in the mountains of Afghanistan or the streets of Iraq but in newsrooms in New York, London, Cairo and elsewhere.

Our enemies have skillfully adapted to fighting wars in today's media age, but for the most part we — our government, the media or our society in general — have not.

Consider that violent extremists have established "media relations committees" and have proved to be highly successful at manipulating opinion elites. They plan and design their headline-grabbing attacks using every means of communication to break the collective will of free people.

Our government is only beginning to adapt its operations for the 21st century. For the most part, it still functions as a five-and-dime store in an EBay world.

I have just returned from Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco. In Tunis, the largest newspaper has a circulation of roughly 50,000 — in a country of about 10 million people. But even in the poorest neighborhoods you can see satellite dishes on nearly every balcony or rooftop.

Regrettably, many of the TV news channels being watched using these dishes are extremely hostile to the West. The growing number of media outlets in many parts of the world still have relatively immature standards and practices that too often serve to inflame and distort rather than to explain and inform. Al Qaeda and other extremist movements have utilized these forums for many years, successfully adding more poison to the Muslim public's view of the West, but we have barely even begun to compete in reaching their audiences.

The standard U.S. government public affairs operation was designed primarily to respond to individual requests for information. It tends to be reactive, rather than proactive, and it operates for the most part on an eighthour, five-days-a-week basis, while world events — and our enemies — are operating 24/7 across every time zone. That is an unacceptably dangerous deficiency.

In some cases, military public affairs officials have had little communications training and little, if any, grounding in the importance of timing, rapid response and the realities of digital and broadcast media. Let there be no doubt that the longer it takes to put a strategic communications framework into place, the more we can be certain that the vacuum will be filled by the enemy and by hostile news sources who most assuredly will not paint an accurate picture of what is actually taking place.

We have become somewhat more adept in these areas, but progress is slow.

In Iraq, for example, the U.S. military command, working closely with the Iraqi government and the U.S. Embassy, has sought nontraditional means to provide accurate information to the Iraqi people in the face of an aggressive campaign of disinformation.

Yet this has been portrayed as inappropriate: for example, the allegations of "buying news." The resulting explosion of critical media stories then causes all activity, all initiative, to stop. Even worse, it leads to a "chilling effect" among those who are asked to serve in the military public affairs field.

Improving our efforts will likely mean embracing new institutions to engage people around the world. During the Cold War, institutions such as the U.S. Information Agency and Radio Free Europe proved to be valuable instruments for the United States. We need to consider the possibility of new organizations and programs that can serve a similarly valuable role in the war on terror.

Although the enemy is increasingly skillful at manipulating the media and using the tools of communications to its advantage, it should be noted that we have an advantage as well. And that is, quite simply, that truth is on our side. Ultimately, the truth wins out.

I believe with every bone in my body that free people, exposed to sufficient information, will, over time, find their way to the right decisions.

We are fighting a battle in which the survival of our free way of life is at stake. It is a test of wills, and it will be won or lost with our public and the publics of free nations around the world. We need to do all we can to correct the lies being told, shatter the appeal of the enemy and attract supporters to our noble and necessary efforts to defeat violent extremism around the globe.
Posted by:.com

#15  All we need is a list of names and addresses of the anti-American journalists. Things will right themselves in the fullness of time.
Posted by: wxjames   2006-02-23 10:12  

#14  This Political Correctness crap is BULLSHIT. I'll come back when this joint turns back into RANTburg again.

And if it doesn't then, well, I guess I won't. See ya...

Posted by: Dave D.   2006-02-23 17:19  

#13  This, obviously, is a big issue for Rummy and hence US and company.

Any swinging dick can put some garbage out in the ME news outlets that slanders our country, our brave soldiers, and our mission.

Unlike previous wars, this war is being waged everyday in the real time news.

The MSM want it both ways, they complain when the military tries to get the truth out by using a PR firm, but they go way out of their way to slime us all.
Posted by: Captain America   2006-02-23 17:13  

#12  God a nut job shows up and kills a thread that need to proceed.

Like PD I have self moderated my commnets because it's the thoughtful and responsible thing for me to do.

My feelings are well know in respect to the "press" and the practitioners of "law" in the United States. If they are actively working to harm our society and way of government. They deserve to feel real pain. Make your own mental image of what that actually means. This image will let you know what I think should happen to government employees whom leak inteligence to the press or talk about their work should face. It would and has been sink trapped when posted here.


I usually wouldn't give Eric S. Raymond the time of day but Gramscian damage" was spot on and an important read. So is this address The Adversary Culture by Keith Windschuttle.

I am questioning some of the redactions too. But at the end of the day it's Fred's site and he can't do as he pleases but some of the moderation a of late is troubling.


Posted by: Sock Puppet O' Doom   2006-02-23 15:44  

#11  Lol. What's that supposed to do, change my mind about you as a classic dimwitted troll who comes here for no discernible constructive purpose and merely wastes bandwidth?

Look. Go home. You're Not up to this, son.

Oh, okay - here's your shot: Read the brilliant piece I linked to in #7: Gramscian Damage. It is a serious article assessing the issues facing Freedom. You are on the wrong side of it, hence I deem you at least a tool if not a dangerous fool.

If you can read it, actually comprehend it, digest what it means, and come back here still convinced you're right, lol, then you're lying, lol.

If it gives you pause, makes you reassess, convinces you to examine the underlying memes that you prattle on about - and pull your head out of your ass, well, I'm sure I'll hear the "POP!" all the way out here in Vegas - and note the change in your posts. Then I will happily have another "dialog" with you. Until then, bite me, junior, lol.
Posted by: .com   2006-02-23 15:44  

#10  .com

believe it or not, I actually agreed with your post#5.
Posted by: Common Sense   2006-02-23 15:24  

#9  Ah, that's better, muddied waters by one of the players.
Posted by: .com   2006-02-23 15:16  

#8  Steve White:

I dont get it. I have seen some regulars in here
post stuff like:

"The Democratic Party is a threat to the Security of the U.S."

or

"The current leadership of the Democratic Party makes me want to spit"

and no dedaction or warning?

Yet if a person comes to defend against comments like that they are banned or dedacted?

Seems to me you have a double standard in here for what you call "trolling".
Posted by: Common Sense   2006-02-23 15:10  

#7  I saw it - and concur with it.

"It could easily be read, and indeed was meant to be read, as an incitement to violence."

I say it's a prognistication that violence will come - and that the press will find itself among the targets for its many treasons. And you know what? It will. You should have read the Opinion peice from Yesterday: Gramscian Damage. It rather brilliantly identified the roots of many of the memes, such as "all violence is bad", which you are using, at least partially, to justify your action.

Not all violence is bad. Were I a tad more erudite, a man of letters, I could construct a logical sequence for you that both demonstrates this and would put you in the awkward position of choosing between violence to preserve liberty and submission. The pieces are there. The only thing missing is that such constructs as not my speciality.

In the fullness of time, many things will happen. wxjames sees this, I see this, and you see this, too. He did not call for dick, he made an observation that any one of us could have made, but perhaps using different wording.

"No apology for it, either."

LOL. Well that sums it up - the rest is just blather. See us. We make no mistakes, we never misconstrue, we never injudisciously malign, we never fuck up. Right. Bullshit, Steve. Total bullshit and you know it. You drop 20 pegs for that obvious load.

This reminds me of a sound byte from a Firesign Theater routine...
Posted by: .com   2006-02-23 14:43  

#6  .com: the comment suggested that we gather names and addresses of 'anti-American' journalists with the idea that 'things would right themselves in time'. It could easily be read, and indeed was meant to be read, as an incitement to violence. Please see the sinktrap for details.

I redacted the comment as opposed to banning the commenter.

We've redacted such comments before. We'll continue to do so. No apology for it, either. We will not carry comments that suggest, imply or advocate a specific call to violence.
Posted by: Steve White   2006-02-23 14:23  

#5  "Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity."

How incredibly vague. If I were a Mod I could sink-trap 80% of the posts - on any site - under that logic.

I happen to think the readacted post of wxjames, above, was (and still is) a common and easily defended attitude - and for good reasons which can be articulated for the 10,000th time, should any of the Mods really need to hear them.

I think the comment should be reinstated and an apology issued to her / him.

I find the current wave of censureship arbitrary. That's a bad thing. Ask any parent. How about some give 'n take before pulling the trigger on a regular who hasn't called for the violent overthrow of the US Govt or the lynching of a Mod, eh?

It's rather embarrassing to see something like this whacked, when a majority here would've / could've said the same thing, but then some asstard posts unsubstantiated politically-motivated bile, but ever so politely stated, you see, and it gets a pass. Yeah, right.

This is Rantburg, is it not? I heard nothing but sucking sounds yesterday - and this isn't a very good start for today, IMHO. What's going on here?

I've been trying to be more moderate in tone - but you can bet your sweet ass it wasn't to please some fucking Mod or any PC-addled finger-wagging drone who hasn't posted an original thought ever. It was for my own peace of mind. This shit just stirs me back up again. Fucking PC twaddle. Justify your actions, on each and every event, or cease "redacting", or change the name to PCville or Burkeville or whatever actually reflects the New Whatever-It-Is.

Pfeh. This really pisses me off. I am not alone, I'd wager.
Posted by: .com   2006-02-23 14:12  

#4  We could also publicly support DoD's attempts to get our message out through friendly media ...
Posted by: lotp   2006-02-23 10:21  

#3  
Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the
sinktrap. Further violations may result in
banning.
Posted by: wxjames   2006-02-23 10:12  

#2  Somebody needs to stop subscribing and linking.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-02-23 08:12  

#1  Someone needs to read the riot act to the NY Slimes and the Washington Compost.
Posted by: doc   2006-02-23 08:07  

00:00